Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and HIPAA for FREE!!

Modeling Health Data Architecture After DNS

Posted on September 12, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I was absolutely intrigued by the idea of structuring the healthcare data architecture after DNS. As a techguy, I’m quite familiar with the structure of DNS and it has a lot of advantages (Check out the Wikipedia for DNS if you’re not familiar with it).

There are a lot of really great advantages to a system like DNS. How beautiful would it be for your data to be sent to your home base versus our current system which requires the patient to go out and try and collect the data from all of their health care providers. Plus, the data they get from each provider is never in the same format (unless you consider paper a format).

One challenge with the idea of structuring the healthcare data architecture like DNS is getting everyone a DNS entry. How do you handle the use case where a patient doesn’t have a “home” on the internet for their healthcare data? Will the first provider that you see, sign you up for a home on the internet? What if you forget your previous healthcare data home and the next provider provides you a new home. I guess the solution is to have really amazing merging and transfer tools between the various healthcare data homes.

I imagine that some people involved in Direct Project might suggest that a direct address could serve as the “home” for a patient’s health data. While Direct has mostly been focused on doctors sharing patient data with other doctors and healthcare providers, patients can have a direct address as well. Could that direct address by your home on the internet?

This will certainly take some more thought and consideration, but I’m fascinated by the distributed DNS system. I think we healthcare data interoperability can learn something from how DNS works.

The Just Enough Culture of HIPAA Compliance

Posted on September 10, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Today I was lucky to finally have a long lunch with Mike Semel from Semel Consulting. Ironically, Mike has a home in Las Vegas, but with all of his travel, we’d never had a chance to meet until today. However, we’ve exchanged a lot of emails over the years as he regularly responds to my blog posts. As Mike told me, “It feels like I’ve known you for a long time.” That’s the power of social media in action.

At lunch we covered a lot of ground. Mostly related to HIPAA security and compliance. As I try to process everything we discussed, the thing that stands out most to me is the just enough culture of HIPAA compliance that exists in healthcare. I’ve seen this over and over again and many of the stories Mike shared with me confirm this as well. Many healthcare organizations are doing just enough to get by when it comes to HIPAA compliance.

You might frame this as the “ignorance is bliss” mentality. In fact, I’m not sure if it’s even fair to say that healthcare organizations are doing just enough to comply with HIPAA. Most healthcare organizations are doing just enough to make their conscience feel good about their HIPAA compliance. People like to talk about Steve Jobs “reality distortion field” where he would distort reality in order to accomplish something. I think many in healthcare try and distort the realities of HIPAA compliance so they can sleep good at night and not worry about the consequences that could come upon them.

Ever since HIPAA ombnibus, business associates have to be HIPAA compliant as well. Unfortunately, many of these business associates have their own “reality distortion field” where they tell themselves that their organization doesn’t have to be HIPAA compliant. I don’t see this ending well for many business associates who have a breach.

The solution is not that difficult, but does take some effort and commitment on the part of the organization. The key question shouldn’t be if you’re HIPAA compliant or not. Instead you should focus on creating a culture of security and privacy. Once you do that, the compliance part is so much easier. Those organizations that continue this “just enough” culture of HIPAA compliance are walking a very thin rope. Don’t be surprised when it snaps.

Proving HIPAA Compliance

Posted on September 9, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Given the name of this blog, I get a lot of people asking me about HIPAA compliance. Many of them that are new to the industry are looking for some sort of regulating or certifying body that they can go to in order to be HIPAA compliant.

Unfortunately, there is no body that can audit you and basically certify that you’re HIPAA compliant. HIPAA is basically a self certification, so you can just claim “compliance.” However, if a real audit happens, you better make sure your ducks are all in a row and that you are actually complying. While there is no body that certifies HIPAA compliance, there are pretty specific guidelines on what you need to do to be HIPAA compliant.

When companies and organizations ask me what they need to do to be HIPAA compliant, I usually suggest they start with these HIPAA trainings from one of my partner companies, 4MedApproved: http://bit.ly/191zR9N (20% discount if you use the code healthcare20 since I’m a partner). The HIPAA compliance officer training will teach you what you need to do and it includes HIPAA documentation templates you can use along with business associate agreement forms. Then, the HIPAA workforce trainings are good to train the rest of your staff. With this training and documentation, you’ll feel much more comfortable saying you’re HIPAA compliant and having something to show for it. You’ll also learn what other places you might be lacking when it comes to HIPAA compliance.

I had someone on a LinkedIn discussion about a breach suggest that organization should regularly train their staff on HIPAA. Turns out that doing so isn’t just a good idea, but is also a HIPAA requirement. Having some sort of proven HIPAA training that you’ve completed is one step in the right direction of proving your HIPAA compliance.

The other major step an organization should take is doing a full HIPAA risk assessment. Many organizations are doing this since they’ve had to in order to get meaningful use money. However, even those organization who aren’t asking for the EHR incentive handout are still required to do a HIPAA risk assessment.

What are you doing in your organization or company to prove HIPAA compliance?

Dishonesty Ruins So Many Things

Posted on September 5, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’m always struck by this simple concept: Dishonesty make so many things more difficult than they should be.

We see this all over healthcare. Look for example at patient privacy and security. If people were just honest and thoughtful with patient data, our privacy and security challenges would be so much simpler. Imagine how much time and heartache we’d save if people were just honest when it comes to privacy and security. Yes, I’m looking at the million of hackers that are trying to take people’s personal information. Imagine if we could focus all the money and time we spend securing applications and apply it to improving healthcare. What a difference that would make.

The same could be said for reimbursement. Our reimbursement system would look drastically different if people were just honest. Yes, I’m talking about the billions of dollars of Medicare and other insurance fraud that’s out there. What a sad expense on our current healthcare system as dishonest people try and make a quick buck. While that expense is large, the even larger cost to our healthcare system is the toll that fraud adds to the honest actors.

Look at our current model of reimbursement for healthcare. So much of our insane documentation efforts are tied to the fact that insurance companies are trying to combat fraud. They don’t and can’t trust providers billing levels and so they’ve created layer and layer of requirements that makes the healthcare documentation process miserable. If you don’t agree with me, then you aren’t someone that’s involved in healthcare reimbursement.

This expense gets passed on to the employer and patients as well. Have you ever tried to make sense of the bill or statement of benefits coming from your doctor or insurance company? It’s like trying to make sense of a new language. It doesn’t make sense since you as a patient don’t know that language. Are they screwing you over in what they’re billing you or not? You don’t know either way and good luck trying to find out the answer. The person on the other end of the phone likely isn’t sure either because it’s so complex.

I first learned this principle in the credit card world. Why on earth do we pay 3+% of every transaction we do on our credit card. The answer is simple. Credit card fraud (otherwise known as dishonesty) is rampant and why credit card transactions cost so much. Imagine a world where the doctor wasn’t giving 3% of their business to process a credit card transaction since the cost to change digital digits should be nothing.

Unfortunately, the reality is we do live in a world with a lot of dishonest people who try and game anything and everything. We have to pay attention to security and privacy with these dishonest people in mind. We have to deal with insane reimbursement requirements as these payers try and combat fraud. We have to deal with credit card fraud and pay for it in the process.

It’s unfortunate, because dishonesty almost always catches up with people. Even when we think it doesn’t, dishonesty pays its own toll on a person as they can never be comfortable. Having a clear, honest conscious is one of the most beautiful things in life.

EHR Certification Flexibility Final Rule Commentary and Analysis

Posted on September 3, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

The news came out late on Friday that the EHR Certification flexibility was published as a final rule. I covered my initial take on the EHR Certification Flexibility on Hospital EMR and EHR. I’ve now had a chance to dig through the delicious 90 pages of government rule making and comments that make up the final rule. For those following along at home, you can skip to page 10 of the document to start the fun read. Although, I’ll also direct you to specific sections that might be of interest to you below.

In this post, I’ll just cover the EHR certification flexibility. You can see the meaningful use extension and delay timelines here. Here’s the important chart when talking about the EHR Certification flexibility (CMS Calls it CEHRT):
2014 EHR Certification Flexibility - CEHRT

The EHR Certification flexibility has a number of major talking points:

  • What Does “unable to fully implement” and “2014 Edition CEHRT availability delays” mean?
  • Fairness of EHR Certification Flexibility
  • 90 Day Reporting Period in 2015 Instead of 365 Days
  • Future Audits

What Does “unable to fully implement” and “2014 Edition CEHRT availability delays” mean?
On page 62 of the rule is the best description of the rule’s intent. It says that if you want to take advantage of this EHR flexibility, then they (Eligible providers or hospitals) “must attest that they are unable to fully implement 2014 Edition CEHRT because of issues related to 2014 Edition CEHRT availability delays when they attest to the meaningful use objectives and measures.” This basically covers the asterisk in the chart above.

This piece of the rule was so unclear that CMS in the final rule used 12 pages (pg. 36-48) to describe when this rule would apply and when it would not apply. CMS tried to make this apply as broadly as possible, but I think they also wanted to encourage as many organizations as possible to not use the exception.

My short summary of these 12 pages is: If you have the 2014 Certified EHR software and can attest to meaningful use stage 2, then you better go ahead and do it. Trying to find a loophole that allows you to avoid meaningful use stage 2 and just do MU stage 1 puts you at risk during a future meaningful use audit.

Of course, if you’re EHR vendor hasn’t provided you the proper software/updates/training, etc that you require to attest to meaningful use stage 2, then this rule will apply. CMS’ intent seems pretty clear. If you can attest to meaningful use stage 2, then you should. However, if your EHR vendor prevents you from being able to attest, then they don’t want to hold the providers accountable for the EHR vendors failure. Although, CMS notes multiple times in the final rule that they don’t want to point blame at the EHR vendors since it could have been other outside issues (ie. final rule was late, ONC-ACB’s were backlogged, etc) that caused the EHR vendors to not be ready.

I wonder if one of the unintended side effects of this rule will be EHR vendors taking their sweet time releasing and rolling out their 2014 Certified EHR product and updates. It’s too late for this in the hospital setting since hospitals have to do a full year of MU 2 on a 2014 Certified EHR starting October 1, 2014. However, the same might not be true on the ambulatory side where they have until the end of the year to start on meaningful use stage 2.

I’ll be interested to see how many organizations are able to take advantage of this delay. Had this rule been finalized in early 2014, it would be a very different story. However, at this late date, I’m not sure that many providers or hospitals will be able to change course.

I mostly feel bad for those organizations that rushed their EHR implementations onto barely-beta-tested 2014 Certified EHR software and will now have no choice but to go forward with meaningful use stage 2. This change in rule makes many of these organizations wish they’d slowed their implementation to make sure they’d done it right and they’d have also only been required to do MU stage 1.

Fairness of EHR Certification Flexibility
The last paragraph above highlights part of the reason why many providers feel that this EHR certification flexibility is unfair. While it’s not a direct penalty on organizations that were on top of things, the change rewards those organizations that didn’t take the risks, push their EHR vendors, and push their implementation timelines to meet the MU stage 2 requirements. The reward an organization gets for going after MU stage 2 is that they have to do a lot more work (Yes, MU2 is A LOT more work) while their procrastinating competitors get to do the much simpler MU1.

This was such an important complaint that CMS addressed these comments in two different places in the final rule (pg. 21-22 and pg. 48-50). CMS tries to argue that in their research they didn’t see providers that were deliberately trying to delay MU stage 2, but found that providers wanted to do MU stage 2, but their EHR vendors weren’t ready. I’d suggest that CMS may want to dig a little deeper.

However, let’s set providers aside for now and assume that they all want to do MU stage 2, but their EHR vendors just aren’t ready for it. This EHR certification flexibility still lets EHR vendors who procrastinated their 2014 EHR certification off the hook. In fact, it rewards them and their users for not performing well. Once again, CMS doesn’t want to point the finger at EHR vendors, but will blame themselves for not finalizing the rule fast enough and ONC-ACB’s for having a backlog. However, if you’re an EHR vendor who’s been 2014 Certified for a while now, no doubt this rule makes you angry since it rewards your competitors in a big way (intended or otherwise).

Certainly there are a lot of reasons why an EHR vendor isn’t yet ready to be 2014 Certified. However, most of them have little to do with the rule making process and the EHR certification backlog. Some freely admit it, and others hide behind excuses. I think CMS realized this EHR Certification flexibility would benefit these EHR vendors, but they didn’t want to punish the providers who use these EHR software.

I still think the simple solution here was to extend this same flexibility to all providers and all EHR vendors. However, in the final rule CMS argues that doing so would reduced the amount of meaningful use stage 2 data that they’d have available to make the adjustments needed to meaningful use stage 3. I understand how a provider doing MU stage 2 this year might feel like the government’s guinea pig. We need you to do MU stage 2 so we can figure out how to make it right in MU stage 3. CMS also argues that they need more people on meaningful use stage 2 in order to push their agenda and the intent of the HITECH act forward. What doesn’t seem aligned to me is the goals of meaningful use and providers’ goals. I think that’s why we see such a disconnect.

90 Day Reporting Period in 2015 Instead of 365 Days
This seems to be one of the most heated discussion points with the final rule. CHIME President and CEO, Russell P. Branzell, even suggested that “Now, the very future of Meaningful Use is in question.”

CMS’ comments about this (pg. 34-36) basically say that a change to the EHR reporting periods was not part of this proposed rule. Then, they offered this reason for why they’re not considering changes to the reporting periods:

We are not considering changes to the EHR reporting periods for 2015 or subsequent years in this final rule for the same reasons we are not considering changing the edition of CEHRT required for 2015 or subsequent years. Changes to the EHR reporting period would put the forward progress of the program at risk, and cause further delay in implementing effective health IT infrastructure. In addition, further changes to the reporting period would create further misalignment with the CMS quality reporting programs like PQRS and IQR, which would increase the reporting burden on providers and negatively impact quality reporting data integrity.

What this comment doesn’t seem to consider is what will happen if almost no organizations choose to attest to meaningful use because of the 365 day reporting period. Talk about killing the “forward progress” of the program. From a financial perspective, maybe that’s great for the MU program. CMS will pay out less incentive money and they’ll make back a bunch more money in the eventual penalties. However, it seems counter to the goal of increasing participation in the program. Personally, I’m not sure that the end of organization’s participation in meaningful use would be such a bad thing for healthcare. It would lead back to a more rationale EHR marketplace.

Future Audits
On page 55-56, the final rule addresses the concerns over audits. We can be sure that some organizations will be audited on whether they were “unable to fully implement 2014 Edition CEHRT because of issues related to 2014 Edition CEHRT availability delays.” Sadly, the final rule doesn’t give any details on what documentation you should keep to illustrate that you meet these requirements for which you will have to attest. The final rule just says that they’ll provide guidance to the auditors on this final rule and that audit determinations are finalized on a case by case basis that will cover the varied circumstances that will exist.

This wouldn’t give me much comfort if I was going through an audit. Not to mention comfort that the auditors wouldn’t interpret something differently. I’ll defer other audit advice to my auditor friends, since I’m not an audit expert. However, in this case you likely know how far you’re stretching the rule or not. That will likely determine how comfortable you’ll be if an audit comes your way. Now you can see why my advice is still, “If you have the 2014 Certified EHR software and can attest to meaningful use stage 2, then you better go ahead and do it.

Conclusion
I really see the meaningful use program on extremely shaky ground. I don’t think this final rule does much to relieve any of that pressure. In fact, in some ways it will solidify people’s bad feelings towards the program. We’ll see for sure how this plays out once we see the final numbers on how many organizations attest to meaningful use stage 2. I don’t think those numbers are going to be pretty and 2015 could even be worse.

Note: For those following along at home (or work), here’s the final rule that I reference above.

4 Health IT and EHR Blogs

Posted on August 29, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

As most of you know, I’ve been regularly trying to feature other Health IT and EHR bloggers out there. A lot of them are creating some really great content and I’m always happy when there are more smart people joining in on the healthcare IT conversation. I hope you enjoy discovering some new blogs that might help you in your work.

Meaningful Health IT News – This is Neil Versel’s healthcare IT blog. Neil is the most prolific healthcare IT journalist out there having written for pretty much every healthcare IT publication over the past couple decades. I’ve mentioned before that Neil’s blog was one of the first ones I looked to when I started writing a blog. I modeled some of the things I do after him. I figured he was a real journalist and I wasn’t, so I should learn from him. I should disclose that Neil’s blog is part of the Healthcare Scene network of blogs. I’m lucky to be able to work with someone like Neil. I only wish he had more time to write on his blog.

Data 4 U – This is a new health IT blog by Lynn Zahner, a former obstetrician/gynecologist, who’s transforming into a health IT professional. Looking at even just the first 3 posts I’m excited to see what Lynn will bring next. It’s always great to have a clinician’s perspective on healthcare IT. I hope Lynn’s able to keep it up.

Kat’s Space – Kat’s blog is a new find for me. She’s a RN and digital marketing interested in tech and social media. It’s too bad I hadn’t found her before now. Sounds like we’d get along really well. She’s also a Google Glass explorer and so she provides some really interesting insights into the Glass and wearable technology space.

Accountable Health – I think we can all use a great accountable health blog. In fact, we can likely use more than one to try and figure out what’s happening with ACOs and other accountable care programs that are in the works. This blog is written by Fred Goldstein. Fred has a unique view of the accountable care world since he’s the Founder of the Population Health Alliance. I think Fred’s blog is one to watch if you care about where healthcare reimbursement is headed.

Healthcare IT Career Resources

Posted on August 26, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

About 10 months ago, we added Healthcare IT Central to the Healthcare Scene family of healthcare IT websites. It’s been a really amazing addition to the network and I’ve been amazed at the thousands of people that have been able to find health IT jobs thanks to Healthcare IT Central. I love blogging because you get the direct interaction with readers, but there’s a really amazing feeling that comes when you play some small role in helping someone find a job.

The other great part about the addition of Healthcare IT Central is the related Healthcare IT Today career blog. If you’re not reading that site, we just added it to our Healthcare Scene email subscription lists so you can receive the latest posts in your email inbox.

Just to give you a little flavor of the type of content we’ve been posting on Healthcare IT Today, we asked the questions, “Has There Been an EHR Consulting Slow Down?” and “Who’s More Satisfied – Full Time Health IT Professionals or Health IT Consultants?” Plus, we even posted really interesting data like a look at the Epic Salary and Bonus structure. Then, since it is a healthcare IT career website, we cover things like LinkedIn tips and LinkedIn as a professional or personal profile.

If you’re someone looking for a healthcare IT job or looking for a better healthcare IT job, we have hundreds of health IT jobs available. You might also check out Cordea Consulting, ESD, and Greythorn that recently posted jobs with us.

If those jobs aren’t your style we have other jobs like this Sales Account Executive at EHR vendor, gMed, or these system analyst jobs at Hathaway-Sycamores Child Family Services and Pentucket Medical.

If you’re an employer looking for amazing healthcare IT professionals, you can register for the site and post your jobs or search our database of over 12,000 active health IT resumes.

Hopefully some of these health IT career resources are helpful to readers of EMR and HIPAA. One thing that’s universal in healthcare is the need to find a job or hire the right talent. Hopefully we’re doing are part to help both sides of the coin.

Can a Client Server EHR Provide All the Same Benefits of Cloud EHR?

Posted on August 25, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

One of the most popular battles discussions we’ve had on this site since the beginning is around client server EHR software versus cloud EHR software. It’s a really interesting discussion and much like our US political system, most people fall into one camp or the other and like to see the world from whatever ideology their company approaches.

The reality I’ve found is that there are pros and cons to each side. Certainly cloud has won out in most industries, but there are some compelling reasons why cloud hasn’t taken hold in many parts of healthcare.

With that in mind, a client server EHR vendor asked me to list out the reasons why someone should go with a Cloud EHR over client server. Here’s my off the cuff responses:

No IT Support Needed beyond desktop support – This is a big benefit that many like. Plus, they add in the cost of the server, the cost of the local IT person and so they see it as a huge benefit to go with cloud software

Automatic Updated Software – Not always true with the cloud, but they like that the software just updates and they don’t have to go around updating software. Of course, this also has its downsides (ie. when an update happens automatically and breaks something)

Small Upfront Cost – Most Cloud solutions are billed on a monthly charge with little to no upfront cost. We could argue the accounting pieces of this and whether it’s really any better, but it feels better even if many cloud providers require the 1-2 year commitment. In some large organizations this type of payment plan is better for their accounting as well (ie. depreciation of equipment, etc)

More Secure – Obviously this could be argued either way, but those that believe cloud is more secure believe that a cloud provider has more resources and expertise to make their cloud secure vs an in house server where no one might have expertise

More Reliable (backup/disaster recovery) – Similar to the secure argument as far as expertise and ability to provide this reliability

Single Database – There are cool things you can do with data when every doctor is on one database and one standard data structure.

Available Everywhere – At home, office, hospital, etc. (Yes, this can be done by many client server as well, but not usually with the same experience).

I’m sure that a cloud EHR provider could add to my list and I hope they will in the comments. As I was making the list, I wondered to myself if a client server EHR vendor could provide all of the benefits listed above. Let me go through each.

No IT Support Needed beyond desktop support – Some EHR vendors will do all the IT support for the user. Plus, it’s a little bit of a misnomer that you need no IT support with a cloud hosted EHR. You still need someone to service your network and computers. More importantly though, most client server EHR vendors are offering a hosted EHR option which basically provides this same benefit to a practice.

Automatic Updated Software – More and more client server vendors are moving to this approach for updates as well. This is particularly true when they offer a hosted EHR environment where they can easily update the EHR. It’s a different mentality for client server EHR vendors, but it can be done in the client server environment.

Small Upfront Cost – We’ve seen this same offer from almost all of the client server EHR companies. It’s a hard switch for EHR companies to make the change from large up front payments to reoccurring revenue, but I’m seeing it happening all over the industry. The only exception might be the big hospital EHR purchase. In the ambulatory EHR market, I think everyone offers the monthly payment option.

More Secure – This is one that could be argued either way. Either one could be more secure. Client Server vs Cloud EHR doesn’t determine the security. A client server EHR can be just as secure or even more secure than a cloud EHR. I agree that generally speaking, cloud EHR is probably more secure than client server, but that’s speaking very broadly. If you care about security, you can secure a client server EHR as much or more than a cloud EHR.

More Reliable (backup/disaster recovery) – Similar to secure, you can invest in a client server infrastructure that is just as reliable as a cloud EHR. It’s true that a cloud EHR vendor can invest more money in redundant systems usually. However, a client server EHR vendor that hosts the EHR could invest just as much.

Single Database – This is the one major challenge where I think client server has a much harder time than a single database cloud EHR provider. Sure, you can export the data from all of the client server EHR software into a single database in order to do queries across client server EHR installs. A few vendors are doing just that. So, I guess it’s possible, but it’s still not happening very many places and not across all the data yet.

Available Everywhere – This can be done by client server as well, but the experience is often a subset of the in office experience. Although, this is rapidly changing. Bandwidth and technology have gotten so good, that even a client server install can be done pretty much anywhere on any device.

Conclusion
Looking through this list, it makes a great case for why client server EHR software is going to be around for a long time to come. There’s nothing on the list that’s so compelling about cloud hosted EHR software that makes it a clear cut winner.

As I thought about this topic, I tried to understand why cloud’s been the clear cut winner in so many other areas of technology. The answer for me is that in our lives portability has mattered a lot more to us. In healthcare it hasn’t mattered as much. Plus, new client server technologies have been portable enough.

Long story short, I’m a fan of cloud technologies in general, but if I were a provider and a client server technology provided me more features, functions, better workflow, etc, than a cloud EHR, I wouldn’t be afraid to select a client server EHR either.

Also worth clarifying is that this post outlines how a client server EHR can provide all of the same benefits of a cloud EHR. However, just because a client server EHR can provide those benefits, doesn’t mean that they do. Many have chosen not to offer the above solutions. Although, the same goes for cloud EHR as well.

What do you think? Are there other reasons why cloud EHR technology is so much better than client server? Is there something I’ve missed? I look forward to reading your comments.

Where is Voice Recognition in EHR Headed?

Posted on August 22, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’ve long been interested in voice recognition together with EHR software. In many ways it just makes sense to use voice recognition in healthcare. There was so much dictation in healthcare, that you’d think that the move to voice recognition would be the obvious move. The reality however has been quite different. There are those who love voice recognition and those who’ve hated it.

One of the major problems with voice recognition is how you integrate the popular EHR template documentation methods with voice. Sure, almost every EHR vendor can do free text boxes as well, but in order to get all the granular data it’s meant that doctors have done a mix of clicking a lot of boxes together with some voice recognition.

A few years ago, I started to see how EHR voice recognition could be different when I saw the Dragon Medical Enabled Chart Talk EHR. It was literally a night and day difference between dragon on other EHR software and the dragon embedded into Chart Talk. You could see so much more potential for voice documentation when it was deeply embedded into the EHR software.

Needless to say, I was intrigued when I was approached by the people at NoteSwift. They’d taken a number of EHR software: Allscripts Pro, Allscripts TouchWorks, Amazing Charts, and Aprima and deeply integrated voice into the EHR documentation experience. From my perspective, it was providing Chart Talk EHR like voice capabilities in a wide variety of EHR vendors.

To see what I mean, check out this demo video of NoteSwift integrated with Allscripts Pro:

You can see a similar voice recognition demo with Amazing Charts if you prefer. No doubt, one of the biggest complaints with EHR software is the number of clicks that are required. I’ve argued a number of times that number of clicks is not the issue people make it out to be. Or at least that the number of clicks can be offset with proper training and an EHR that provides quick and consistent responses to clicks (see my piano analogy and Not All EHR Clicks Are Evil posts). However, I’m still interested in ways to improve the efficiency of a doctor and voice recognition is one possibility.

I talked with a number of NoteSwift customers about their experience with the product. First, I was intrigued that the EHR vendors themselves are telling their customers about NoteSwift. That’s a pretty rare thing. When looking at adoption of NoteSwift by these practices, it seemed that doctor’s perceptions of voice recognition are carrying over to NoteSwift. I’ll be interested to see how this changes over time. Will the voice recognition doctors using NoteSwift start going home early with their charts done while the other doctors are still clicking away? Once that happens enough times, you can be sure the other doctors will take note.

One of the NoteSwift customers I talked to did note the following, “It does require them to take the time up front to set it up correctly and my guess is that this is the number one reason that some do not use NoteSwift.” I asked this same question of NoteSwift and they pointed to the Dragon training that’s long been required for voice recognition to be effective (although, Dragon has come a long way in this regard as well). While I think NoteSwift still has some learning curve, I think it’s likely easier to learn than Dragon because of how deeply integrated it is into the EHR software’s terminology.

I didn’t dig into the details of this, but NoteSwift suggested that it was less likely to break during an EHR upgrade as well. Master Dragon users will find this intriguing since they’ve likely had a macro break after their EHR gets upgraded.

I’ll be interested to watch this space evolve. I won’t be surprised if Nuance buys up NoteSwift once they’ve integrated with enough EHR vendors. Then, the tight NoteSwift voice integrations would come native with Dragon Medical. Seems like a good win win all around.

Looking into the future, I’ll be watching to see how new doctors approach documentation. Most of them can touch type and are use to clicking a lot. Will those new “digital native” doctors be interested in learning voice? Then again, many of them are using Siri and other voice recognition on their phone as well. So, you could make the case that they’re ready for voice enabled technologies.

My gut tells me that the majority of EHR users will still not opt for a voice enabled solution. Some just don’t feel comfortable with the technology at all. However, with advances like what NoteSwift is doing, it may open voice to a new set of users along with those who miss the days of dictation.

Giving Email Addresses to Patients Who Don’t Have Them

Posted on August 21, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

In my post, 4 Things Your Patient Portal Should Include, I talked about the thing patients want most in a patient portal is the ability to communicate with someone in the physician office. I still think that’s the most powerful part of a patient portal.

In response to that post, the people at Engaged Care sent me an interesting way that they’re approaching engaging the patient. Their efforts are focused on those patients who don’t have an email address. Check out this video which demonstrates the workflow they offer.

I’m not sure how many patients don’t have an email address, but this is a pretty slick solution to get them signed up for an email address. The other challenge is getting those patients who don’t have an email address motivated and skilled enough to check the newly created email as well. However, maybe access to a well done patient portal might be motivation enough for them to get involved.

The other benefit to these physician provided email addresses is that they are secure. You might remember that native email is not HIPAA secure. The email addresses that Engaged Care provides are HIPAA secure.

I’ll be interested to see how this company does. How many patients actually use the new email addresses and where they take it next. Although, I found the idea of giving patients a secure email address quite interesting.