His family trusted me with his care, but I knew little about my patient, except that he would die without a mechanical pump to support his failing heart. He had undergone unsuccessful emergency coronary bypass surgery elsewhere before being transferred to our hospital. In our possession were Xeroxed records from his old chart, which we used as part of our effort to piece together his medical history.

As we stood in the operating room ready to make the skin incision, a call from the insurance company was transferred in. The unconscious patient's policy covered heart transplantation but not the mechanical pump needed to keep him alive while awaiting a donor heart. Should I proceed with lifesaving surgery and potentially bankrupt our program, or should I hold off? In any case I could be sued, either by the patient's estate for denying care or by the insurance company for compelling them to spend several hundred thousand dollars to transplant the saved patient.

I write this editorial because I chose to operate, but unfortunately this is not always the case, even by esteemed healthcare providers. Ultimately we settled the insurer's complaint that if our team had not prolonged this man's life, the company could have avoided the transplant expense. More importantly, this gentleman has gone on to live a very productive life with his new heart.

Nevertheless, the trust that this patient's family placed in medicine was not supported by America's health insurance system or our health information programs or our malpractice protection. He was protected by the deeply ingrained professionalism that permeates the culture of medicine, a tradition that is being eroded.

For example, our healthcare system offers inherently conflicting incentives arising from erratic insurance coverage rules. Many who read this piece may not be familiar with the subtleties of their own insurance policies. Ironically, 15 percent know their benefits precisely because they own absolutely no health insurance. As a result, other than emergencies, physicians and hospitals must factor in insurance concerns as the care of patients is discussed.

Lack of a rudimentary national health information sharing system hinders accurate decision-making and quality control, especially as rudderless patients bounce around the healthcare system. Patients cannot negotiate their often-serpentine path to wellness without better road signs, and their doctors often do not have or make the time to serve as tour guides. Balkanized health information systems offer little continuity of care for patients and limited insights into whether the clinical care provided remains up to date. The resulting clinical errors cause an estimated 98,000 deaths annually.

Further, our medical malpractice adjudication procedures result in a form of "jackpot justice" that neither helps many of the harmed nor drives doctors and hospitals to improve the quality of care they provide. The costs to the system, including defensive medicine, are estimated at $50-100 billion a year.

In the end, the locus of control in healthcare does not rest with anyone—not overwhelmed doctors, disenfranchised patients, or even those paying most of the bills (businesses and government). This lack of accountability leads to proposed solutions that are only stopgap measures and do not address the root cause of the myriad concerns and complaints about our healthcare system—a disintegration of trust.

Physicians appreciate this reality but they have lost their voice. Most Americans recognize that the medical profession has a rich heritage of placing the patient's interests first, continually improving proficiency, and regulating themselves. But doctors also have a civic duty to reveal the need for meaningful transformation of our nation's healthcare system. These sentiments are coalescing more as a movement than as an organization.

Together with the Columbia University's Institute for Medicine as a Profession, led by David Rothman, and the Center for Health Transformation, founded by Newt Gingrich, we have surveyed numerous physicians, nurses, health business leaders and laypeople using individual interviews and focus groups. Three broad themes have crystallized that could build trust in a 21st century intelligent healthcare system. What do the healthcare providers prescribe for America?

1. Modernized health information systems will reduce dangerous and expensive medical errors. Electronic patient records can be shared between doctors and brought together to produce meaningful outcomes data that support decision-making. Under such a system, both doctors and patients would be better informed and medical practice would be advanced. We need to build a national health information infrastructure that includes standards for collecting and sharing data to reduce wasteful paperwork and save money. Our banks should not have better information systems than our hospitals.

2. Progressive health justice programs should build trust by prompting doctors to more readily share the truth about unexpected outcomes with patients and colleagues. How else can we learn from the mistakes that humans taking care of humans are destined to make? Plus, the public benefits much more from solutions that reduce errors in care than from compensation systems for the few who win the litigation lottery. Many solutions have been offered, including creation of health courts (resembling tax courts) where expert panels could streamline payment of money to injured patients and families with less delay and overhead. Perhaps the few doctors who are dishonest with their patients about errors would be ineligible for these health courts.

3. Affordable health insurance for all is essential to protect the trust between doctor and patient and to avoid scenarios like the case described above. In addition, besides unnecessarily delaying their care, uninsured patients become expensive drains on our healthcare system, and we end up paying, anyway. A variety of plans have been suggested to achieve this goal, including subsidizing insurance premiums for the poor while compelling all others to purchase a discounted minimum plan (as is the case with automobile insurance). We need to pick a program and get going.

These are not new ideas, but the power of doctors agreeing to push for change can be transformational. The public deserves honest insights from its healers, combined with earnest efforts from its elected officials, to act on these opinions. How else can we nurture the trust that saves lives? It kept my patient alive. Let's pass it on.

About the Author: Post contributing writer Mehmet Oz is a world-renowned transplant surgeon, professor of surgery at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, and co-author of the New York Times bestseller You: The Owner's Manual.