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!!

RIP CCHIT

Posted on October 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.

CCHIT announced that it was ending 10 years of service.

Today, the Certification Commission for Health Information Technology (CCHIT) announced that it is winding down all operations beginning immediately. All customers and business colleagues have been notified, CCHIT staff is assisting in transitions, and all work will be ended by November 14, 2014.

Alisa Ray made these comments in the announcement:

“We are concluding our operations with pride in what has been accomplished”, said Alisa Ray, CCHIT executive director. “For the past decade CCHIT has been the leader in certification services, supported by our loyal volunteers, the contribution of our boards of trustees and commissioners, and our dedicated staff. We have worked effectively in the private and public sectors to advance our mission of accelerating the adoption of robust, interoperable health information technology. We have served hundreds of health IT developers and provided valuable education to our healthcare provider stakeholders.”

“Though CCHIT attained self-sustainability as a private independent certification body and continued to thrive as an authorized ONC testing and certification body, the slowing of the pace of ONC 2014 Edition certification and the unreliable timing of future federal health IT program requirements made program and business planning for new services uncertain. CCHIT’s trustees decided that, in the current environment, operations should be carefully brought to a close”, said Ray.

The announcement also said that CCHIT would be donating its remaining assets to the HIMSS Foundation. Makes sense since HIMSS kind of gave them a partial home the past few months as they tried to save the jobs of the many who worked at CCHIT. Credit should go to Alisa Ray for all she did to try and give those who worked at CCHIT a soft landing.

Long, long time readers of this blog will remember my long blog posts talking about CCHIT and the lack of value that they provided the EHR industry. I believed then and even now that EHR certification was more of a tax on the industry than it was something that provided value to the market. They told me it provided some assurance to the purchaser of the EHR, but I never saw such assurances.

Once EHR certification was made part of meaningful use and the HITECH act, it basically made CCHIT irrelevant. Although, I still think that EHR certification in its current state doesn’t provide value to organizations and I’d love to see it go away. Sadly, there’s some legislation which is pushing the opposite direction.

While I disagreed with CCHIT’s approach to EHR certification and the value they provided, I do think there were good people who worked there that had good intentions even if we disagreed on the approach. I hope they all land somewhere great.

CCHIT to Leave the ONC Certification Business

Posted on January 28, 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.

Update: Multiple people sent me the email that was sent to CCHIT certified EHR vendors that details this decision. In the email, along with what’s detailed below, CCHIT suggests a transition to ICSA Labs for EHR certification and talks about a new allegiance with HIMSS to provide new programs and policy guidance including a series of summits and events to support that work. I’m still waiting for an official response from CCHIT and will update the post if they respond.

Update 2: Here is CCHIT and HIMSS press release about the change and also ICSA Labs comments on the change. Drummond Group also issued this response.

I recently got word from a source close to the EHR certification world (yes, that could be just about any EHR vendor or EHR consultant) that CCHIT is about to announce they are leaving the ONC Certification business. I was told that CCHIT will test those that are already in the pipeline, but will not continue as an ONC EHR certifying body. I’d still classify this as a solid rumor for now (I emailed them for comment, but still haven’t gotten a response. I’ll update the post if I do.), but it comes from a reliable source. Plus, CCHIT did just cancel their weekly webinar series. No point in doing the webinar series if you’re not going to be certifying EHR anymore.

Whether the rumor is true or not, it’s worth considering the EHR Certification bodies and what would happen if any of them decide to not go forward with EHR certification. It will likely have a major impact on the meaningful use program.

I don’t think we should be surprised by this decision if indeed it is the case. CCHIT was started years before ARRA and meaningful use. They were created with a cost structure that was higher because they were charging a lot more for their EHR certification when they started. Once ARRA hit, CCHIT was marginalized and as EHR certification was commoditized and codified, CCHIT became irrelevant. Plus, with three new competitors certifying EHR, the prices for EHR certification dropped dramatically.

Furthermore, I think that all of the EHR certifying bodies are finding that 2014 EHR Certification is much more complex and time consuming than the 2011 certification. Yet the price to certify is basically the same. To me, the economics of the EHR certification business were never good.

Think about the business. Let’s say you get paid about $30,000 per EHR certification. There are only 600 customers (at the time we thought it was closer to 300) for your entire business and many of those don’t even pay the full $30k. Enter in 3 competitors and you’re now sharing a market of less than $18 million or $4.5 million per certifying body. Not to mention the stimulus is for only 5 years with many of the EHR vendors likely to consolidate, stop certifying, or go out of business. Plus, EHR certification is not a high margin business and requires expensive government certification. The economics just aren’t that exciting as an entire business.

This rumor is also interesting when paired with the comments I’ve heard that the EHR certification bodies have a backlog of EHR vendors that are trying to get 2014 certified. They’re having to schedule their testing day months out. If CCHIT gets out of the EHR certification business, then that will only increase the delay in 2014 EHR certifications. I wonder if this will lead to another call for a delay in meaningful use stage 2. Can it be delayed now that some have already started MU stage 2?

I’ve never been a fan of EHR certification. I think it represented a lot of cost and very little value to the EHR industry, doctors and patients. I’ll never forget when I asked Marc Probst, Intermountain CIO and member of the ONC committee that worked on EHR certification, why we needed EHR Certification if people had to show meaningful use of the requirements. If you can show meaningful use of a requirement, then the software can certainly do that requirement, no? He answered, “I lost that battle.”

Whether this rumor is true or not, the next couple months are going to be really interesting months for EHR vendors. How many will get across the 2014 EHR Certification line in time? How many will fail in the process? Will the ONC-CHPL be able to keep up? If CCHIT does leave ONC EHR certification behind, what will they do next? Can CCHIT do something to make themselves relevant again?

EMR Vendors Struggle With Meaningful Use Stage 2

Posted on October 29, 2013 I Written By

Katherine Rourke is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she's served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

CCHIT head Alisa Ray, clearly, is trying to put it delicately. EMR vendors are “struggling a little bit” when it comes to meeting 2014 criteria. “It  has been a slow start,” Ray told Healthcare IT News.

Usually, hearing this would lead to an inside baseball discussion of vendor operations, which wouldn’t be very exciting. But the thing is, meeting 2014 certification criteria is necessary to allow providers to meet Meaningful Use Stage 2. So vendor struggles in complying with CCHIT’s criteria should concern providers a great deal.

There are three areas of Stage 2 that are proving to be an issue for vendors: clinical quality measures, interoperability and automated measure calculation for reporting metrics, Ray said.

This has led to a real lag in certifications. About 40 companies had listed products with the CCHIT in 2011, but a scant 21 percent of those have stepped up and gotten certified in the 2014 criteria.

According to Ray’s chat with Healthcare IT News, “almost everyone has struggled and been surprised by the complexities” of meeting 2014 standards.  Despite having gone through the process yearly since 2006 with CCHIT, several have had to go through repeated certification trials to meet criteria.

ICSA Labs’ Amit Trivedi, meanwhile, noted that while there were close to 3,000 listings, with many having multiple listings — Cerner alone had 800 — so far there less than 300 on ONC’s Certified Health IT Products list.

There are signs that EMR vendors will catch up, the HIT story suggests. For example, vendors have been working particularly hard to offer Continuity of Care Documents or Direct messaging, a capability providers must demonstrate for Meaningful  Use Stage 2, said Matt Kohler, vice president of Network Infrastructure Services at Surescripts.

But vendors clearly have some serious development challenges ahead if they want to keep up with the pace set by Meaningful Use Stage 2.  If I were a provider reading this, I’d call my vendor right away and see where they were at in the certification process.

Healthcare Groups Want Meaningful Use Evaluated Before Stage 3

Posted on January 16, 2013 I Written By

Katherine Rourke is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she's served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

Though the final rules for Meaningful Use Stage 3 aren’t due to take effect until 2016, ONC has already made the draft rules available for public comment.  And comments, to be sure, the agency is getting.

While various groups have chosen their own details to critique, the general consensus seems to be that ONC is getting ahead of itself and ought to give Meaningful Use Stage 1 and 2 a good hard look first.

Accordng to a nice summary from iHealthBeat, here’s where some of the major healthcare groups stand:

* The American Hospital Association is recommending that ONC fund a comprehensive evaluation of MU generally, and while it does, hold off on finalizing Stage 3 recommendations.

*  CHIME, too, is asking ONC to evaluate the existing Meaningful Use program to decide whether achieving stage 3 is realistically possible by 2016.

* The Federation of American Hospitals is also arguing that ONC needs to evaluate current Meaningful Use requirements.  Also, in its letter to ONC, the group argues that the existing structure of two years per stage doesn’t cut it.

* The AMA weighed in with its own recommendation that ONC evaluate Meaningful Use as is before moving ahead. It also suggested changing some thresholds to  make them more reachable; greater flexibility in program requirements; change the certification process to address usability; and improve HIT’s capability to share patient data.

Personally, I think the idea of doing an extensive Meaningful Use evalulation sounds like a good one, and I hope ONC actually does so.  When you’re setting new standards that affect so many providers, why not gather some data on how existing standards work?

Final EHR Certification Bodies – Meaningful Use Monday

Posted on July 23, 2012 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.

This seems mostly like a formality, but NIST has published the list of Accredited Testing Laboratories (ATLs), that are qualified to test EHR technology under the Permanent EHR Certification Program. You might remember that the permanent EHR certification program was delayed.

Here are the list of companies that are part of the final EHR certification bodies:

  • Drummond Group
  • Certification Commission for Health Information Technology (CCHIT)
  • ICSA Laboratories, Inc.
  • InfoGard Laboratories, Inc.
  • SLI Global Solutions

All of them are familiar names and ones that have been doing work with EHR certification the whole time. I think this is generally good for consistency of EHR certification. Can you imagine if you’d certified your EHR using one of the bodies and then that body didn’t get approved for the permanent EHR certification. Sure, the criteria are still the same, but there’s some differences in the processes each EHR certification body uses.

As most of you know, I’ve been a long opponent to EHR certification. I think it’s pointless and provides no value to physicians. However, someone in Washington put it in the HITECH legislation, so we’re stuck with the idea of a certified EHR. The good thing is that ONC and CMS have basically rendered it meaningless since every EHR vendor has basically become a certified EHR or will be soon. Of course, that also illustrates how pointless the EHR certification really is.

All in all, the EHR certification bodies are going to be around for a number of years more. I’m not sure if they’ll survive post HITECH. I just wish they were providing something “meaningful” (pun intended.

Few Doctors Ready To Qualify for Meaningful Use

Posted on May 3, 2012 I Written By

Katherine Rourke is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she's served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

A new study published in Health Affairs has confirmed what I, at least, have suspected for some time about physicians and their EMRs.  The study, which surveyed 3,996 physicians, found that while 91 percent were eligible for Medicare or Medicaid Meaningful Use programs, only 11 percent of those intending to apply had their act together.

Researchers, who analyzed data from the 2011 mail survey supplement to the annual National Ambulatory Medicare Care Survey, found that 51 percent of respondents were planning to apply for MU Stage 1 incentive programs. However, it seems that only 11 percent of doctors planning to apply have a capable enough EMR set-up to support up to two-thirds of Medicare Stage 1 core objectives.

Now, this was not completely unexpected. In the final Stage 1 MU rule, CMS had estimated that 10 to 36 percent of Medicare eligible pros, and 15 to 47 percent of Medicaid eligibles, would end up meeting the agency’s criteria.

And it should be noted, the HealthAffaits authors remind us, that about 124,000 eligibles had registered in 2011, and that CMS had paid out $275 million to 15,000 participants. Also, Medicaid programs paid out about $220 million to about 10,500 physicians.

Still, you can’t bury poor performance like this in a pile of data. Clearly, a program is lacking something important just over 1 in 10 physicians manage to set themselves up for Meaningful Use cash — especially if  they were trying hard to do so.

The problem with news items like these is that they don’t get into what’s holding physicians back. It’s actually a bit disappointing that the HealthAffairs study didn’t offer any red meat on the “Why Can’t Doctors Qualify?” issue, as we all know that talking about problems doesn’t make them go away.  (I do admit that in the world of public policy at least, simply underscoring a problem gives rulemakers ammunition to dig deeper into an issue.)

Still, I’d love to know what you’re seeing out there in terms of unprepared physicians. Are we talking practices that got fast-talked into buying inappropriate or junky technology?  Lack of understanding what they bought?  Slow-moving practices that are on the right track?

Despite Focus On Security Compliance, Provider Data Still Isn’t Secure

Posted on April 26, 2012 I Written By

Katherine Rourke is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she's served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

It looks like we’ve got a billion-dollar mismatch between rules and reality here. An established security research firm has released a study suggesting that while providers are working hard on meeting HIPAA and other security regs, their data isn’t any more secure than when it was before

Kroll’s 2012 HIMSS Analytyics Report: Security of Patient Data, concludes that the rate of  provider data breaches has been rising over the past six years, despite pressure on providers to conduct more security audits and otherwise tighten up their data ship.

What’s scary about this trend is that the healthcare institutions surveyed by Kroll don’t seem to be aware of the problem.  Health IT execs rated themselves at 6.4 out of 7 (seven being “extremely prepared’) on their readiness to address data security. That’s up from 6.06 in 2010 and 5.88 in 2008.

But the data Kroll gathered suggests that they’re overconfident at best. It found that 27 percent of respondents had reported a breach during the past twelve months, up from 19 percent in 2010  and 13 percent in 2008. Worse, of those who saw breaches, 69 percent of providers had seen  more than one breach.

Now, it would be easy to say that regs like HIPAA, Meaningful Use standards and the Red Flags rules are malformed, and that this is just another case of government getting it wrong to industry’s detriment. If there’s any truth to this notion, I do hope CMS leaders take notice and adjusts some of its requirements;  Heaven knows they’d get plenty of credible, carefully thought-out feedback if they ask.

Unfortunately, though, I suspect far from being that easy. We’d all love it if we could just follow the rules, get government approval then say “stick a fork in it, security’s done.”  But as readers know,  security is such a complex mix of implementing technologies and changing inappropriate behaviors that it’s hard to tease out just what went wrong sometimes.

Still, it’s good to have an organization like Kroll remind us that meeting HIPAA requirements isn’t the be all and end all.  Unfortunately, it’s really just the beginning.

New mHealth App Certification – The Next CCHIT Like Mistake

Posted on January 17, 2012 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 first heard about the new Secure, Branded App Store for Hospitals and Healthcare called Happtique in early December on Techcrunch. At its core, I think it’s an interesting idea to try and filter through what the article claims are “23,000 mobile health apps available for iOS and Android.” Helping physicians and hospital administrators filter through these apps could be valuable. Plus, most hospital administrators would love a way to have a phone that was limited on which apps it could download.

Well, it seems that the company has shifted gears a little bit. As Brian Dolan from Mobi Health News reported, Happtique is taking the first steps to setting up a certification for mobile health apps.

Happtique, a healthcare-focused appstore, announced plans to create a certification program that will help the medical community determine which of the tens of thousands of health-related mobile apps are clinically appropriate and technically sound. The company has tapped a multi-disciplinary team to develop the “bona fide mHealth app certification program” within the next six months. The program is open to all developers and will be funded by developer application fees.

It will certify apps intended to be used by both medical professionals and patients.

While I think that providing some way for people to filter through the large number of mobile apps, I think certification is a terrible way to go about it. Many people know I’ve written many an article about CCHIT pre-EHR incentive money and how screwed up the CCHIT EHR certification was for the industry. I think it’s just as bad news for Happtique to create a certification for the mobile health industry.

Turns out that Happtique seems to have agreed with this idea back in October 2010 where they said in a MobiHealthNews interview, “We are not in the business of opining whether an app is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ though. That’s not our role. Apple doesn’t do that and others don’t either. If the FDA indicates that an app is a medical device and needs to be regulated, well, that’s a different situation and we can take it out of the store.” Seems they’ve seen a different business opportunity.

They have a couple recognizable names on their board to create their certification including Howard Luks and Dave deBrokart (better known as e-Patient Dave), but I believe they’re going to find that it’s an impossible task. First, because they won’t have the breadth of knowledge needed to create certification requirements for every type of mHealth app. Second, what value will the certification really provide? Third, how do you make the certification broad enough to apply to all 20,000+ apps while still providing meaning to those using a very specific mHealth app? Plus, I’m sure there are many other issues I haven’t thought of yet.

The problem with these certification ideas is that they start with great intentions, but always end up bad.

Meaningful Use Numbers from 2011 and Looking Towards 2012 – Meaningful Use Monday

Posted on January 16, 2012 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.

HITECH Answers recently posted a great post that gives a run down of the EHR Incentive program’s progress in 2011. Here’s their list with my own analysis and commentary of each point.

123,921 Eligible Professionals have registered for EHR Incentives, 15,255 have successfully attested to meaningful use in the Medicare program.
This seems like such a HUGE difference in numbers. That’s just over 12% of Eligible Professionals that registered attested to meaningful use. Does this mean that we’re going to see a tidal wave of meaningful use attestation in 2012? Possibly.

I believe that we’ll see more eligible professionals attesting to meaningful use in 2012. However, the question is how many of those other 108,666 will attest to meaningful use in 2012 and how many are like the Happy EMR Doctor who just registered to see the MU process. I wonder how many first hand meaningful use experiences by doctors will scare doctors away from MU attestation.

3.077 Eligible Hospitals have registered EHR Incentives and 604 of those have successfully attested to meaningful use.
This is almost 20% of hospitals that have registered that have attested to meaningful use. It’s not surprising that this number is a lot higher than eligible professionals. I still believe that the wave of meaningful use attestation will come from these other 2473 hospitals and probably many more that still haven’t registered. I haven’t seen a good number of how many hospitals are in the US. Does anyone know that number? The EHR incentive money that goes to hospitals will dwarf those of eligible professionals.

$2,533,689,145 has been paid out in Medicare and Medicaid Incentives.
$2.5 billion sent out in 2011. I just went back to the first time I tagged meaningful use on this site on April 3, 2009 (coincidentally I have 19 pages of 10 posts each tagged with Meaningful Use). Amazing to think that it’s taken basically 3 years to spend $2.5 billion on EHR.

277 hospitals have received payments under both Medicare and Medicaid and of those 12 were CAHs.
That’s about half of the hospitals that have attested to meaningful use under Medicare are also getting the Medicaid EHR incentive money as well.

22% of eligible professionals that have been paid EHR incentives are Family Practitioners and 20% are Internal Medicine.
I must admit that I would have thought that the percentage of family doctors that got paid EHR incentive money would have been a lot higher. I guess when you have so many other specialty areas I shouldn’t be that surprised. I also wonder why the internal medicine number is so high. These numbers actually make me believe that a lot of family practice doctors are sitting out when it comes to meaningful use.

41 States Medicaid programs were open for registration. Two additional States launched in January of 2012.
I wonder what’s holding back the other 7 states. From what I’ve seen all the states will eventually get there.

More than 1500 EHR products have been certified by ONC-ATCBs.
That’s a lot of EHR software. I still put the EHR company list at about 300 EHR vendors. 1500 includes multiple versions of the same software, partial EHR certification for products like data warehouses, ePrescribing, etc. The best thing that’s come from the ONC-ATCB program is that it has made EHR certification basically irrelevant in the EHR selection process. Every EHR vendor is certified now. This is much better than the false assurances that EHR certification provided before. I still dislike what EHR certification has done to the industry, but at least it’s not misleading doctors the same way it was before.

CCHIT Has Become Irrelevant

Posted on June 22, 2011 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.

For those of you that are relatively new to EMR and HIPAA, you might not appreciate this post as much as long time readers of EMR and HIPAA. A few years back, I admit that I was pretty harsh on CCHIT and their EHR certification. I remember one guy stopping me at a conference and after realizing who I was asked, “so what’s your issue with CCHIT?” I was happy to answer that I thought they misled the industry (doctors in particular) by saying that the CCHIT certification provided an assurance that the EHR was a good EHR. They never came outright and said this, but that’s what EMR sales people would communicate during the sales process.

In fact, EHR certification was incorrectly seen by many doctors and practice managers as the stamp of approval on an EHR being of higher quality, more effective, easier to use, and was more likely to lead to a successful EHR implementation. EHR certification today still has some of these issues. However, the fact is that the EHR certification doesn’t certify any of the great list above. If EHR certification of any kind (CCHIT or otherwise) could somehow assure: a higher implementation success rate, a better level of patient care, a higher quality user experience, a financial benefit, or any other number of quality benefits, then I’d support it wholeheartedly. The problem is that it doesn’t, and so they can’t make that assurance.

So, yes, I do take issue with an EHR certification which misleads doctors. Even if it’s the EHR salespeople that do the misleading.

I still remember the kickback I got on this post I did where I said CCHIT Was Marginalized and the post a bit later where I said that the CCHIT process was irrelevant. Today, I came across an article on CMIO with some interesting quotes from CCHIT Chair, Karen Bell. Here’s a quote from that article.

In addition, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT’s (ONC) new program has provided two new reasons for certification: proof that an EHR can do the things that the government wants it to do, and to enable eligible providers and hospitals to get EHR incentive money.

“The idea is not to assure the product will do all things that are desired for patient care, instead, the idea is to stimulate innovation,” said Bell. As a result, the program is considered a major success because more than 700 certified health IT products are now on the ONC website. “The idea was to get a lot of new products started. This is a very different reason for certification than what we began doing several years ago,” she said.

However, just because CCHIT or another ONC-Authorized Testing and Certification Body (ONC-ATCB) doesn’t test and certify for a particular ability, that doesn’t mean the EHRs don’t have it. “It’s just up to [the provider] to make sure the vendors have it,” said Bell.

I first want to applaud Karen Bell and CCHIT for finally describing the true description of what EHR provides a clinic assurance that:
1. The EHR does what the government wants
2. You are eligible for the EHR incentive money
Then, she even goes on to say that it’s up to the providers to make sure the vendors have the right capabilities for their clinic.

I imagine Karen and CCHIT would still probably say that the CCHIT “complete” EHR certification provides assurance that…< fill in the blank >, which the ONC-ATCB EHR certification doesn’t provide. The happy part for me is that even if CCHIT says this, no one is really listening to that message anymore.

Yes, CCHIT has essentially become irrelevant.

I can’t remember anyone in the past year asking me about CCHIT certification. From my experience, many people care about ONC-ATCB EHR certification, but they really couldn’t care less if it comes from CCHIT, Drummond Group, ICSA Labs, SLI Global, or InfoGuard (That’s all of them right?). Have any of you had other experiences?

I also do enjoy the irony of this post coming right after my post about differentiation of EMR companies (Jabba vs Han Solo). CCHIT is the reason that I know so much about the challenge of EHR differentiation. CCHIT’s efforts provided some very valuable (and lengthy) discussions over the past 5 years about ways to help doctors differentiate between the 300+ EHR vendors. As you can see from my comments above, I was just never satisfied with CCHIT being the differentiating factor. As you can see from my post yesterday, I’m still searching for a satisfactory alternative for differentiating EHRs. Until then, we’ll keep providing an independent voice a midst all the noise.