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!!

Healthcare Big Data Use, Real Patient Engagement, and Practice Marketing

Posted on May 5, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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 use to do these a lot more and I think people enjoyed them. So, maybe I’ll start doing them again. It’s basically a short Twitter round up of some interesting tweets and often some pithy commentary about the tweets. Let me know what you think.


This seems about in line with my own personal experience talking to people. Although, some might argue that 100% are clueless. We’re all still trying to figure out all the data.


Great article by Michelle. I agree with her that I hate patient engagement. I love engaging patients, but I think that meaningful use requirements have forever corrupted the term patient engagement. We better move on to a new term, because I assure you that what’s happening with meaningful use is not engaging patients.


This is a little self serving, but Wednesday (5/6/15) I’ll be doing a webinar on the topic of practice marketing. I’m going to cover quite a bit of ground from a high quality practice website, to search engine optimization (SEO), reputation management, and meaningful patient engagement (sorry I had to use the term after my last comment). I hope many of you will attend and then let me know what you thought of it.

Will We Be Maintaining Our Genomic Health Record?

Posted on May 4, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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.

If you’re interested in Genomic Medicine like I am, be sure to check out my article on EMR and EHR called “When Will Genomic Medicine Become As Common As Antibiotics?” That’s a really interesting question that’s worth considering. We’re not there yet and won’t get there for a couple years. However, I think that genomic medicine will become as common as antibiotics and will have a massive impact on healthcare the way antibiotics have as well.

The article mentioned links to a genomics whitepaper that talks about a person’s genomic health record. I’d never heard the term before, but I’m definitely intrigued by the idea of everyone having their own genomic health record.

We’ve talked forever about people having a personal health record which they need to collect and maintain. Some people store it in a PHR on the web and others store it on a mobile phone. However, we’ve never really seen the personal health record take off. This is true for a number of reasons. The first is that it’s still quite difficult to aggregate your entire health record across multiple providers. I even read of one PHR that was paying doctors to provide them a patient’s record. The second problem is that patients don’t know what to do with all the records once they have them. Even if they go to their doctor and say they have their full patient record, the doctor hands them a stack of health history forms to fill out. Best case, they file a copy of the patients records in the chart (usually in some sort of PDF or paper copy).

Now let’s think about those challenges from the perspective of a genomic health record. If you’ve paid thousands of dollars for genomic tests and analysis, are you going to want to pay that again to the next doctor you see? No, they’re going to ask you for your copy of their genomic record and use that as part of your care. Patients won’t want to pay for another genomic test and it will be easier to get their record, so they’ll be more motivated to get and maintain it than they were with a simple personal health record. It’s pretty compelling to consider.

Some challenges and questions I have about how this will evolve. Will your PHR start to include your genomic health record or will it be something that’s stored separately? Will their be a standard for the genomic health record so that the doctor can easily use that record in the work they’re doing? Will the genomic health record be so large that it will have to be stored in the cloud?

What do you think of the concept of a genomic health record?

The Next Major Healthcare Product – Care Management System

Posted on May 1, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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.

While meeting with a lot of people at HIMSS I started to think about what would be the next “must have” IT system that a healthcare organization would look at purchasing. When you look back at the history of IT purchases in healthcare, the Practice Management System (PMS or PM depending on your preference) was one of the first systems that most practices purchased. It was an easy buy for most people. They saw a lot of value to digitize the billing side of their practice. Adoption of practice management systems was widespread. Everyone was and is using one.

After the practice management system came the Electronic Health Record (EHR, but many could argue that EMR came before EHR, but that’s semantics in my books). Over the 10 years that I’ve been blogging about EHR software, we’ve seen the evolution of people asking if they should buy an EHR software to everyone realizing that they needed to go electronic but were trying to figure out which solution was best to $36 billion of government money which basically had the vast majority of doctors choose to hop on board EHR. While we don’t have 100% EHR adoption, we’re getting there. The market for EHR purchases is quite mature now.

With that as background, I’ve been thinking about what system or platform would be purchased next by a practice. I asked a number of people at HIMSS about this. Dr. Tom Giannulli from Kareo suggested that Care Plan Engagement could be an interesting next step. With the coming ACOs and value based reimbursement, you can see where Dr. Tom is coming from in his thinking. Plus, his term mixes the meaningful use term of patient engagement with the care plan approach that’s likely going to be required in future business models.

When I sat down with Carl Ferguson from CTG, he called the next product a Care Management System. When I heard it, I thought that this term could have staying power. The practice management system manages the practice (ie. billing). The electronic health record stores the records electronically. The Care Management System is going to be centered on the patient and the care that a patient receives.

What do you think of the term: Care Management System? There were probably a hundred products at HIMSS that have started to build a product like this. Although, I think a care management system would probably have to be a combination of a number of products out on the market today.

Regardless of what we call it, I think what will set apart the next big healthcare IT product offering is that it will be centered around the patient. A care management system by its very nature would have to be interoperable since the care is being given across multiple organizations. A care plan would make since because the patient’s at the center of the care management system and everyone could be involved in creating the care plan and ensuring that the care plan is being followed. At first take, I really like this terminology and I hope it gains some traction.

One challenge with the term Care Management System is that the abbreviation is CMS. That abbreviation is already quite popular with the government organization (CMS) and also the popular Content Management System (CMS). Although, if that’s the biggest problem with the term, then I feel pretty good about it. Although, this does make me wonder if we’ll go back to the age old integrated PM/EHR debate again when it comes to an integrated EHR/CMS. Will EHR vendors see this opportunity and offer a Care Management System module for their EHR? Some probably think they already are doing that.

Great Meaningful Use and Eligible Providers Chat

Posted on April 29, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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 recently received an email from a regular reader, Dr. Mike, who owns a single specialty ortho group. In the email Dr. Mike talks about the challenges that Eligible Providers (EPs) are facing with meaningful use stage 2. He describes the story as falling on “deaf ears” at CMS and ONC. He also offered these stats on meaningful use to illustrate his case that meaningful use is a failure:

Only 38,472 have attested to Stage 2, My guess is that only about half actually did Stage 2 as there was the Stage 1 reprieve. Even so, that is only 18% of EPs have successfully attested which is an complete failure of MU.

Then, he asked me an important question:

Someone ask CMS and ONC the tough questions please…Now what are they going to do?

In response to him, I told him that I’d been talking about the challenge that meaningful use is for doctors for quite a while. However, I also told him that most hospitals are participating in meaningful use, so “we’ll see how that plays out.” What I meant is that in the meaningful use program we now have one group (EPs) that are not doing so well with meaningful use and their hospital counterparts that are relying on the millions in EHR incentive money (not to mention avoiding the penalties).

Then I answered his important question, “I can tell you what ONC and CMS are going to do. Spin It!”

Of course, Dr. Mike is great at engaging in conversation so he offered this reply:

1. Elizabeth Myers and the rest of CMS and ONC really did try to spin every bad number and “we cannot assess the numbers yet” was a constant theme.
2. I totally agree they will continue to try to spin the numbers or ignore them as long as possible. I’m not sure why they cannot face the truth about MU.
3. The 36K that did MU 2 are the cream of the crop. I would even argue that the other 82% are the cream also as they were the early adopters and gung ho about MU. The fact that 82% of the over achieving EPs have skipped out on MU 2 is a travesty. There is NO chance ONC and CMS is going to pull in the lagging EPs.
4. If you don’t know already, I own a single specialty Ortho group and we skipped MU completely after we saw the MU 2 rules. Proposed MU 3 just help us box it up and bury it.

I have no idea why ONC and CMS cannot let go of the program, let EHR vendors actually work with EPs for all the thing we are missing from our IT (usability, safety, security, efficiency). Right now we cannot do anything to customize our workflow or improve our experience as it will potentially decertify the EHR for MU. MU sucks all the air out of the room. EHRs right now are a billing and click box for MU system with a marginal clinical system slapped on…

Its about time ONC lets the market do its thing, instead of this constant objective, measures, menu, core, numerators, denominators, attesting, auditing disaster they created.

Once EPs leave the program, they are not coming back. So this should be a big deal for ONC and CMS.

I haven’t gone in and fact checked his numbers (I’d love to hear if you have different numbers), but the emotion in his comments is something I’ve heard from many providers. In fact, I’ve heard it from many EHR vendors. They’re tired of coding their EHR software to the test and the government regulations as well. They want to do more innovative things, but the government regulations are stifling their ability to do it. Resources only go so far.

I think we’re in the early days of provider discontent with meaningful use. However, it’s starting to boil. I’ll be interested to see what happens when it boils over. I’m predicting that will happen once many of these doctors start seeing the penalties hit their pocketbooks.

Usability Pyramid – How Does It Apply to EHR and Healthcare IT?

Posted on April 28, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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 saw this wonderful usability pyramid come across my Twitter feed:

There’s so much we can learn in healthcare from this pyramid. I’m still chewing on whether the pyramid is the right way to display each of these 4 areas, but I love the way that it breaks it out into these 4 categories. Do they build on each other though?

As I look at these 4 categories of usability, I think that healthcare IT and EHR have done a pretty good job at the functional area. I also think that most of the advanced EHR users are able to work quickly in their EHR. In fact, it’s a complaint I often hear from EHR users that the EHR is so powerful that it takes forever to configure it. The experienced users love these extra configuration options.

I think very few EHR and healthcare IT companies have done a great job on the intuitive and beautiful side of usability. Many doctors think they can just pick up an EHR and start using it just like they did their iPad. This just isn’t the case. It requires a mix of configuration and training to make an EHR work effectively for an organization. Should it? I have yet to find an EHR where this isn’t the case.

I’d love to hear where people think various healthcare IT and EHR applications fit on this pyramid. Let’s hear it in the comments.

Telemedicine Startup Offers Providers A Shot At Equity

Posted on April 22, 2015 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.

Over the last couple of years, the number of telemedicine vendors out there fighting for business has exploded.  These include DoctoronDemand, GoTelecare, HealthTap, MDLIVE, American Well and many, many more.

Health plans are jumping on the bandwagon too. For example, United Healthcare  has been running a popular national television campaign advertising its “virtual clinic” services. UHC is my plan, so I can attest that this service — shown as embedded in its member site — hasn’t been rolled out yet, but that only makes its desire to get out in front of the trend more noteworthy.

Telemedicine models in play include companies that recruit providers and sell them to consumers, vendors who enable telemedicine via proprietary platforms and firms that lead with community building. At present the direct-to-consumer players seem to be somewhat ahead, simply because they’ve already begun developing a national brand, but the story doesn’t end there.

Though consumer-facing telemedicine companies probably have a viable business model, they’ll have to build a memorable consumer brand to make it, something that takes a great deal of  time and money.  On the other hand, vendors that offer white-label telemedicine technology to hospitals and health plans have at least as much to gain, without having to win the loyalty of fickle consumers.

One telemedicine player doing just that is Nashville-based PointNurse, which has developed a distributed collaboration and communications platform providers can use to deliver telemedicine services. I just spoke to CEO Cyrus Maaghul, who gave me a company overview, and was interested to hear that his venture is taking things in some new directions.

PointNurse is different than most companies in the telemedicine space for a few reasons.

For one thing, the platform includes block chain capabilities, which allow providers to accumulate credits for both community participation and actual care delivery. (In case you aren’t familiar with block chain technology, which powers crypto currency Bitcoin, you may want to click here.)

These credits aren’t just for fun. Eventually, when providers accumulate enough credits, they get a pro-rata share of a dedicated pool of equity.

Consumers, for their part, are given a multi-signature wallet which stores both their personal and clinical information, resulting more or less in a PHR with added capabilities. PointNurse hasn’t yet devised a way to share the data with provider EMRs, but that’s a short-term goal.

A wide range of providers can participate in PointNurse, including not only MDs but also nurse practitioners, pharmacists, RNs, LPNs and elder advocates.

A sister venture, HealthCombix, will license the technology underlying PointNurse to hospitals and payers. HealthCombix will provide APIs and tools to build their own distributed applications.

As Maaghul sees it, it’s critical for providers to realize more than a short-term benefit from participating in telemedicine. “I wanted to make providers feel highly motivated — that they can gain from this [arrangement],” Maaghul said. “This creates value for the patient.”

Of course, there’s no proof yet that this or any particular telemedicine business model is going to capture its market niche.  In fact, it’s not even clear what niches will emerge in this space; after all, though it’s moving fast it’s far from mature.

That being said, this approach has some intriguing aspects. I’ll be interested to see whether its business model and and unusual underlying technology work out.

Some High Level Perspectives on FHIR

Posted on April 20, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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.

Before HIMSS, I posted about my work to understand FHIR. There’s some great information in that post as I progress in my understanding of FHIR, how it’s different than other standards, where it’s at in its evolution, and whether FHIR is going to really change healthcare or not. What’s clear to me is that many are on board with FHIR and we’ll hear a lot more about it in the future. Many at HIMSS were trying to figure it out like me.

What isn’t as clear to me is whether FHIR is really all that better. Based on many of my discussions, FHIR really feels like the next iteration of what we’ve been doing forever. Sure, the foundation is more flexible and is a better standard than what we’ve had with CCDA and any version of HL7. However, I feel like it’s still just an evolution of the same.

I’m working on a future post that will look at the data for each of the healthcare standards and how they’ve evolved. I’m hopeful that it will illustrate well how the data has (or has not) evolved over time. More on that to come in the future.

One vendor even touted how their FHIR expert has been working on these standards for decades (I can’t remember the exact number of years). While I think there’s tremendous value that comes from experience with past standards, it also has me asking the question of why we think we’ll get different results when we have more or less the same people working on these new standards.

My guess is that they’d argue that they’ve learned a lot from the past standards that they can incorporate or avoid in the new standards. I don’t think these experienced people should be left out of the process because their background and knowledge of history can really help. However, if there isn’t some added outside perspective, then how can we expect to get anything more than what we’ve been getting forever (and we all know what we’ve gotten to date has been disappointing).

Needless to say, while the industry is extremely interested in FHIR, my take coming out of HIMSS is much more skeptical that FHIR will really move the industry forward the way people are describing. Will it be better than what we have today? I think it could be, but that’s not really a high bar. Will FHIR really helps us achieve healthcare interoperability nirvana? It seems to me that it’s really not designed to push that agenda forward.

What do you think of FHIR? Am I missing something important about FHIR and it’s potential to transform healthcare? Do you agree with the assessment that FHIR very well could be more of the same limited thinking on healthcare data exchange? I look forward to continue my learning about FHIR in the comments.

Engaging Clinician Leadership to Adopt Healthcare Technology – Breakaway Thinking

Posted on April 15, 2015 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Carrie Yasemin Paykoc, Senior Instructional Designer / Research Analyst at The Breakaway Group (A Xerox Company). Check out all of the blog posts in the Breakaway Thinking series.
Carrie Yasemin Paykoc

In many healthcare organizations, IT leaders are given the ultimate responsibility of implementing and adopting electronic health records (EHRs) and other health information technology (HIT) because the build and installation fall within their responsibility. While their technical skills and experience are necessary to select, install and maintain the HIT system, clinician leadership should ultimately own the use of the system.

Ownership of the system requires commitment to establish best practice workflows and system parameters that clinicians follow and evolve over time. The risk is that the technology won’t be used to its fullest potential and could even pose potential harm when used incorrectly or without knowledge of how information is entered, accessed, and used by other providers. In a recent alert from the Joint Commission, 23 percent of all reported HIT-related events were due to poor design and data associated with clinical content. Ensuring nurses, physicians, pharmacists, and other clinical staff are involved in decisions about how the system will be used will help alleviate these issues and ensure proper system use.

Over the years, The Breakaway Group’s research has shown that clinician leadership must be highly engaged to effectively adopt new EHRs and HIT systems. In fact, it is the most important predictor of successful EHR adoption. While clinician leader engagement may appear straightforward, competing priorities make it difficult to maintain the degree of engagement required after a new EHR system goes live.

For example, clinician leadership may see fewer patients or put certain responsibilities on hold until the system is implemented. In reality, responsibilities associated with the HIT system must shift and evolve among all stakeholders throughout the adoption journey. After go-live, clinician leadership involvement shifts from decisions around clinical applications and best practice workflows to decisions around upgrades, optimization of the system, and identifying workarounds. Both pre- and post-go-live responsibilities take time and need to align with the overall responsibilities for each role within the healthcare organization.

Involvement of clinician leadership early on in the adoption journey helps create a culture that embraces change and instills a sense of ownership to all levels in the organization. This cultural shift is not easy and requires the right mix of calculated planning and visionary leadership that must resonate with clinicians. A recent article published by The New York Times, describes the paradox of clinicians resisting new EHRs and creating “technology that physicians suddenly can’t live without.” On one hand this technology is causing resistance among clinicians to the point of reverting to paper, while on the other, this technology is helping mitigate countless medical errors and waste. Clinician leadership must engage to address both sentiments and create a culture conducive to change. With the rate of technological advances, a cultural status quo will not suffice.

Naturally clinicians are data scientists and lifelong learners. Show them data and provide them a comfortable learning environment to get up to speed quickly. Then they can help review the data and identify areas for improvement. For example, clinicians can query orders associated with quality outcomes such as electronic orders for flu vaccinations and determine if the rate ordered aligns with internal quality metrics. If the rate is below the agreed upon threshold, clinician leaders can focus efforts on systematically improving the rate ordered.

The longer clinician leadership involvement is delayed, the more likely resistance will fester and organizational culture will be at risk. Adopting technology, especially technology associated with government requirements, is painful and simply takes time. The difference is whether clinician leadership is involved early in the decision making process. If you do not want your clinician reverting to paper charts and/or throwing laptops and mobile devices out of sheer frustration, give clinicians the time and resources to fully engage in the adoption journey.

Xerox is a sponsor of the Breakaway Thinking series of blog posts.

Three Key Capabilities to Manage Population Health

Posted on April 7, 2015 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Marc Willard, President of Transcend Insights.
Marc Willard - Trascend Insights
The health care industry’s transition from fee-for-service to value-based reimbursement models demands a dramatic shift in how medical information is used and shared. The ability to generate a single, comprehensive patient view from an individual’s acute care, ambulatory care and wellness data is vital to support this transition. Ten years ago, the technology to move data out of silos to create real-time, physician-friendly, patient-centered population health management (PHM) systems was simply not available.

Fast-forward to 2015, where recent technological breakthroughs are fueling a new era in PHM that promises to help patients achieve their best health while allowing health care systems to create population health platforms that reward value, improve outcomes and reduce costs. For PHM vendors to successfully navigate this profound shift in the health care industry and provide actionable insights on an individual’s complete health care and health status, they need to deliver three key technologies:

  • Community-wide interoperability;
  • Real-time health care analytics; and
  • Intuitive care tools.

Community-Wide Interoperability

In developing a successful PHM system, one of the greatest challenges is working with disparate electronic health record systems that are not designed to communicate with each other, consequently keeping patient data entrenched in silos. Nothing is more frustrating for health care systems, physicians and care teams than dealing with multiple views and logins that impede the flow of information.

For PHM vendors to be successful, they must offer sophisticated health information exchange technology that integrates both clinical and claims data from diverse sources into a single, comprehensive patient view. Recent advances in cloud-based interoperability technology allow health care systems, physicians and care teams to literally get on the “same (electronic) page” with their patients’ complete health care history and real-time treatment strategies.

Interestingly, for health information exchange technology to successfully meet the needs of PHM, we must think beyond traditional electronic health record system interoperability. In addition to integrating data from health information generated outside the four walls of the hospital in ambulatory settings, successful PHM companies will be able to incorporate the valuable insights generated from the latest wearable health technologies that track activity levels, heart rate and other health information into a single, comprehensive patient view. This patient engagement is crucial in the new value-based reimbursement environment, with its focus on wellness and preventive medicine. PHM companies must know how to capture it and deliver meaningful insights to physicians and care teams without overwhelming them.

Several capabilities are required to ensure successful PHM, including bi-directional semantic interoperability, master patient indexing, both clinical and claims data capture and integration, real-time information sharing, results distribution and order processing, care and consent management tools, and of course privacy and security.

Another aspect that is crucial for interoperability is unobstructed access to patient information within traditional silos, so that data can truly be shared. Allowing data to flow requires open systems and interoperability standards that are clean, and widely and easily adopted.

Real-Time Health Care Analytics

A strong PHM tool combines community-wide interoperability with real-time health care analytics capabilities. Effective health care analytics should be able to identify evidence-based gaps in care, drug safety concerns and other opportunities for health improvement while ensuring compliance with the latest clinical guidelines and national quality measures to maximize reimbursement.

Yet the true value in health care analytics is the ability to deliver these insights quickly and simply at the point of care. Every minute counts in health care delivery, and even a five-minute delay in processing information is unacceptable during an office visit, as the physician needs to move on to his or her next patient in a timely manner.

Rather than processing health care data in batch mode, over hours or days, a real-time analysis engine should process data in milliseconds. This enables more informed decisions at the point of care to further ensure that every individual can achieve his or her best health. Physicians now have the ability to take a longitudinal view of how these analytic insights contribute to their patients’ past, present and future health.

Effective real-time health care analytics also allows physicians and care teams to compare an individual’s health status against population benchmarks. By doing so, they can track clinical trends such as readmission rates to further support intervention strategies, reduce risk and decrease costs.

Intuitive Care Tools

Physicians and care teams are more willing to utilize real-time insights generated by sophisticated analytics if they can be easily accessed in a matter of seconds, with just one or two clicks. Even more useful is mobile technology that provides a single, comprehensive view at the physician’s fingertips.

When developing intuitive care tools, PHM vendors should consult directly with physicians to better match and accommodate their unique information needs. For example, offering physicians access to comprehensive clinical trends across a population provides vital insights. When equipped with this information, physicians can improve care delivery through proactive interventions that create meaningful change.

Getting patients involved in the health care equation is equally important when developing intuitive care tools. For example, real-time insights available via mobile point of care solutions allow physicians to maintain eye contact with their patients, have a more meaningful discussion and improve the overall patient experience. As a result, mobile point of care solutions can help physicians encourage their patients to become active participants in their own health, for example, increasing a patient’s medication adherence to help with reducing readmissions.

In addition, once we understand a patient’s total health status and health care needs, physicians and care teams can recommend customized wellness programs that directly address current or future health care concerns. Patient engagement tools as well as a single, comprehensive consumer view can help empower individuals to take control of their own lifestyle choices. For example, smoking cessation classes, nutrition counseling or exercise programs, can help keep individuals healthy and minimize the need for medical interventions.

Keep the Focus on the Patient

With the movement from fee-for-service to value-based reimbursement models, the demand has never been greater for population health management systems that accomplish the industry’s triple aim: improving population health, enhancing the patient experience and reducing costs.

PHM vendors can simplify this transition by developing platforms that offer community-wide interoperability, real-time health care analytics and intuitive care tools. The health IT industry’s transformation must continue to be centered on the patient, whose health and well-being remain the focus of today’s population health management initiatives.

About Marc Willard
Marc Willard is the president of Transcend Insights, a wholly owned subsidiary of Humana Inc., dedicated to simplifying population health. The company, which launched in March 2015, represents the merging of three leading health care information technology businesses: Certify Data Systems, Anvita Health and nliven systems. For more information about Transcend Insights, visit: www.transcendinsights.com.

The Healthcare Penalties Are Coming!!

Posted on April 3, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 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.

We all know about the Meaningful Use penalties. The PQRS penalties. The Value Based Modifier penalties. Individually, they’d all be annoying, but I don’t think most healthcare organizations have understood what these penalties will be in aggregate.

This hit home to me when I was reading a smartly titled post by Jim Tate called “What you don’t do in 2015 will cause 9% CMS penalties in 2017” Here’s how he describes the penalties that are in store for healthcare:

MU: Failing to achieve MU in 2014 will bring a 2% penalty beginning in 2016 with a 1% annual increase up to 5%.

Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS): Non-participation brings a Medicare reimbursement reduction of 2.0% in 2016 based on 2014 data.

Value-Based Modifier(VBM): The VBM, which many providers are not aware of, is linked to PQRS. Beginning in 2016, eligible providers (EPs) in groups with 10 or more EPs will be subject to a penalty based on performance. In 2017, this will include all EPs, not just those in larger groups.

Taken together, this adds up to a 9% penalty in 2017 based on 2015 participation.
To avoid these penalties, immediately assess your current participation in the MU, PQRS, and VBM programs. If you are not on track you must take steps to mitigate your risk as soon as possible.

Risk mitigation is the right way to describe it. As I mentioned in the beginning, I don’t think that many providers are planning ahead to avoid these penalties. I also don’t think they realize the long term consequences of the choices they make today.

Thanks Jim for waking us up to the reality.