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!!

Patient Engagement Panel – Inaugural Online Medical Conference

Posted on September 11, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the 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 and John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

John Bennett, MD reached out to me recently about a unique opportunity to be part of the 1st International Online BioMedical Conference. The conference was unique because it was being organized completely online using Google Hangouts as the platform for speakers. Having done a number of Google Hangouts on Healthcare IT myself, I thought it would be a unique opportunity to test out the online conference waters.

As part of the conference, I brought together a panel of social media and healthcare IT rockstars to talk about Patient Engagement (in all its facets) and the challenges of patient engagement. Plus, I wanted to be sure we talked about how it could help and hinder care. On the panel were Colin Hung (@Colin_Hung), Dr. Nick Van Terheyden (@DrNic1), Dr. Charles Webster(@wareflo), and myself (@ehrandhit). With such a wide set of experiences, it made for a really great discussion. You can watch it below:

Thanks to each of my fellow panelists for participating with me and to Manuel and Dr. Bennett who organized the conference.

Is HIPAA Misuse Blocking Patient Use Of Their Data?

Posted on August 18, 2015 I Written By

Anne Zieger 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.

Recently, a story in the New York Times told some troubling stories about how HIPAA misunderstandings have crept into both professional and personal settings. These included:

  • A woman getting scolded at a hospital in Boston for “very improper” speech after discussing her husband’s medical situation with a dear friend.
  • Refusal by a Pennsylvania hospital to take a daughter’s information on her mother’s medical history, citing HIPAA, despite the fact that the daughter wasn’t *requesting* any data. The woman’s mother was infirm and couldn’t share medical history — such as her drug allergy — on her own.
  • The announcement, by a minister in California, that he could no longer read the names of sick congregants due to HIPAA.

All of this is bad enough, particularly the case of the Pennsylvania refusing to take information that could have protected a helpless elderly patient, but the effects of this ignorance create even greater ripples, I’d argue.

Let’s face it: our efforts to convince patients to engage with their own medical data haven’t been terribly successful as of yet. According to a study released late last year by Xerox, 64% of patients were not using patient portals, and 31% said that their doctor had never discussed portals with them.

Some of the reasons patients aren’t taking advantage of the medical data available to them include ignorance and fear, I’d argue. Technophobia and a history of just “trusting the doctor” play a role as well. What’s more, pouring through lab results and imaging studies might seem overwhelming to patients who have never done it before.

But that’s not all that’s holding people back. In my opinion, the climate of medical data fear HIPAA misunderstandings have created is playing a major part too.

While I understand why patients have to sign acknowledgements of privacy practices and be taught what HIPAA is intended to do, this doesn’t exactly foster a climate in which patients feel like they own their data. While doctor’s offices and hospitals may not have done this deliberately, the way they administer HIPAA compliance can make medical data seem portentous, scary and dangerous, more like a bomb set to go off than a tool patients can use to manage their care.

I guess what I’m suggesting is that if providers want to see patients engaged and managing their care, they should make sure patients feel comfortable asking for access to and using that data. While some may never feel at ease digging into their test results or correcting their medical history, I believe that there’s a sizable group of patients who would respond well to a reminder that there’s power in doing so.

The truth is that while most providers now give patients the option of logging on to a portal, they typically don’t make it easy. And heaven knows even the best-trained physician office staff rarely take the time to urge patients to log on and learn.

But if providers make the effort to balance stern HIPAA paperwork with encouraging words, patients are more likely to get inspired. Sometimes, all it takes is a little nudge to get people on board with new behavior. And there’s no excuse for letting foolish misinterpretations of HIPAA prevent that from happening.

Transferring Custody of a Chart to the Patient – Could That Drive Patient Engagement?

Posted on August 11, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the 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 and 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 wrote about the concept of health information disposal and how we’re going to have to reevaluate how we approach disposing of patients charts in this new digital world. Plus, EHR vendors are going to have to build the functionality to make it a reality. However, some replied to that article that in this new world we shouldn’t ever dispose of charts.

We’ll leave that argument for that article (or in the comments) and instead discuss another concept that Deborah Green from AHIMA told me about. Deborah suggested that one possible solution for digital chart disposal would be to transfer custody of the chart to the patient. I think that terminology might not sit right with some people since the patient should have access to the chart regardless. However I think the word custody has a slightly different meaning.

When a healthcare organization is ready to dispose of an electronic chart based on their record retention laws (which usually vary by state), then it’s the perfect time to give patients the opportunity to download and retain a copy of their paper chart before it’s destroyed. In that way, the healthcare organization could worry less about deleting the electronic chart since they’ve transferred “custody” of the chart to the patient.

This removes the responsibility of storing the patient chart from the healthcare organization and puts it on the patients that want to have their entire medical chart. The perfect custodian of the patient chart is the patient. At least it should be.

I wonder if a healthcare organization informing patients that their old charts will be deleted would be enough to actually drive patient engagement and download of their electronic record. While meaningful use has required the view, download and transmit of records by patients, most people have been gaming that requirement without patients really getting the benefit. I have a feeling that patients hearing the words “deleted chart” would wake a lot of them up from their slumber. They wouldn’t know why they’d want the paper chart, but I imagine many would take action and preserve their medical record. Once they download the chart, it would be the first step towards actually engaging with their health data.

What do you think? Is transferring custody of the electronic record the right approach to health information disposal? Would this drive a new form of patient engagement? Would it wake up the sleeping giant which is involved patients?

HIM Departments Need More Support

Posted on July 16, 2015 I Written By

Anne Zieger 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.

As both a contributor to this blog, and an assertive, activist patient managing chronic conditions, I get to see both sides of professional health information management.  And I have to say that while health data management pros obviously do great things against great odds, support for their work doesn’t seem to have trickled down to the front lines.  I’m speaking most specifically about Medical Records (oops, I mean Health Information Management) departments in hospitals.

As I noted in a related blog post, I recently had a small run-in with the HIM department of a local hospital which seems emblematic of this problem. The snag occurred when I reached out to DC-based Sibley Memorial Hospital and tried to get a new log-in code for their implementation of Epic PHR MyChart. The clerk answering the phone for that department told me, quite inaccurately, that if I didn’t use the activation code provided on my discharge summary papers within two days, my chance to log in to the Johns Hopkins MyChart site was forever lost. (Sibley is part of the Johns Hopkins system.)

Being the pushy type that I am, I complained to management, who put me in touch with the MyChart tech support office. The very smart and help tech support staffer who reached out to me expressed surprise at what I’d been told as a) the code wasn’t yet expired and b) given that I supplied the right security information she’d have been able to supply me with a new one.  The thing is, I never would have gotten to her if I hadn’t known not to take the HIM clerk’s word at face value.

Note: After writing the linked article, I was able to speak to the HIM department leader at Sibley, and she told me that she planned to address the issue of supporting MyChart questions with her entire staff. She seemed to agree completely that they had a vital role in the success of the PHR and patient empowerment generally, and I commend her for that.

Now, I realize that HIM departments are facing what may be the biggest changes in their history, and that Madame Clerk may have been an anomaly or even a temp. But assuming she was a regular hire, how much training would it have taken for the department managers to require her to simply give out the MyChart tech support number? Ten minutes?  Five? A priority e-mail demanding that PHR/digital medical record calls be routed this way would probably have done the trick.

My take on all of this is that HIM departments seem to have a lot of growing up to do. Responsible largely for pushing paper — very important paper but paper nonetheless — they’re now in the thick of the health data revolution without having a central role in it. They aren’t attached to the IT department, really, nor are they directly supporting physicians — they’re sort of a legacy department that hasn’t got as clearly defined a role as it did.

I’m not suggesting that HIM departments be wiped off the map, but it seems to me that some aggressive measures are in order to loop them in to today’s world.

Obviously, training on patient health data access is an issue. If HIM staffers know more about patient portals generally — and ideally, have hands-on experience with them, they’ll be in a better position to support such initiatives without needing to parrot facts blindly. In other words, they’ll do better if they have context.

HIM departments should also be well informed as to EMR and other health data system developments. Sure, the senior people in the department may already be looped in, but they should share that knowledge at brown bag lunches and staff update sessions freely and often. As I see it, this provides the team with much-needed sense of participation in the broader HIT enterprise.

Also, HIM staff members should encourage patients who call to log in and leverage patient portals. Patients who call the hospital with only a vague sense that they can access their health data online will get routed to that department by the switchboard. HIM needs to be well prepared to support them.

These concerns should only become more important as Meaningful Use Stage 3 comes on deck. MU Stage 3 should provide the acid test as to whether whether hospital HIM departments are really ready to embrace change.

Patient Safety and EHR’s: Q&A with Two Companies Striving to Make a Difference – Breakaway Thinking

Posted on July 15, 2015 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Lori Balstad, Learning and Development Specialist at The Breakaway Group (A Xerox Company). Check out all of the blog posts in the Breakaway Thinking series.
Lori Balstad
While electronic health records (EHRs) have been in existence since the late 1960s, it wasn’t until almost 30 years later that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) concluded that healthcare would be safer with computerized physician order entry, estimating that 100,000 Americans die each year from preventable adverse events. Now in 2015, most have heard the frightening number of deaths per year due to medical errors—400,000—or more than 1,000 lost lives in the U.S. every day. Preventable medical errors cause the third most deaths in the U.S., right after heart disease and cancer. With many organizations either upgrading old systems or making the decision on their first EHR, it is critical that patient safety is the ultimate goal.

Enter two companies striving towards this goal on both sides of the process:  The Breakaway Group and Sociotechnologix.

The Breakaway Group, A Xerox Company, is committed to ensuring healthcare organizations gain value from technology.   Our innovative approach using “flight simulators” allows users to practice new workflows and reinforce the handoffs required to achieve the quality and safety outcomes they expect. Our research-based solution expedites end-user adoption of new technologies and using the EHR system to its full potential.  This results in fewer errors, and a higher level of care.  Healthcare professionals adopt new applications faster, giving back critical time for providers to do what they do best – care for patients.

Sociotechnologix works to help healthcare organizations understand the influence of culture and leadership on safety and quality of care.  The implementation of technology can create significant patient risk when not used correctly or when system issues are ignored post go-live.  Sociotechnologix uses a validated assessment to measure HIT safety.  This focus on organizational culture drives organizations to integrate quality initiatives into every aspect of care.  They recently launched a tool that allows providers to quickly and easily identify patient safety risks in their EHR.  The application called SafeHIT, provides detailed analytics on the safety, usability, and workflow, from the perspective of clinicians to prioritize safety issues. As sighted by Westat in a report for The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC), “Examining health IT incidents within the context of the socio-technical model enables organizations to look beyond the incident to understand it in the context of the people who use the system and the other technologies and processes affected by health IT. Understanding these interactions enables high-reliability organizations to make improvements to their health IT systems when flaws in the systems are identified that can lead to patient harm.”

In the following Q&A, we discuss how EHRs impact patient safety and how each company hopes to improve it. The individuals interviewed from each company are Dr. Heather Haugen, CEO and Managing Director of The Breakaway Group, and Dr. Michael Woods, a Principal of Sociotechnologix, LLC.

Question #1: How must healthcare change to ensure proper use of EHRs for improved safety?

Heather: We must move beyond an implementation mindset.  The hard work begins when the technology is installed.  An EHR is simply one tool we can use to improve care processes.  It requires clinical leadership and a long term commitment to achieve the promise of the EHR- improved quality and safety.

Michael: No one would give their child a medication the FDA had not approved as safe and effective, yet we don’t think twice about having our child cared for in a hospital that has implemented an EHR whose safety and efficacy for patients (and users) hasn’t been systematically demonstrated. Clinical leaders and their organizations will not be able to optimize quality and patient safety without committing to a structured methodology to capture, track, and fix the EHR safety, usability, and workflow issues encountered daily on the frontline of care.

Question #2: Can you share examples of how your company helps improve patient safety?

Heather: We are witnessing a unique time in healthcare.  Healthcare leaders face an increasing number of competing priorities with fewer resources every year.  If we continue to quickly push more technology into clinical care processes without ensuring users are proficient, we will experience an increase in errors and negative impact on quality and safety.  By mimicking the clinical environment, we can easily assess end user proficiency in their actual workflow before they use the live system.  These clinicians are less likely to make an error and learn the system faster.  Giving clinicians time back to focus on the patient and properly use the tools results in safer care.

Michael: We use a sociotechnical approach to assess an organization’s overall patient safety. HIT is one of three components in our model, but it has profound impact on the other two, culture and process. In consulting to a number of organizations, we consistently found EHRs leave frontline caregivers frustrated, cognitively burdened (culture), and forcing workarounds (processes) to the EHR to ensure their patients aren’t harmed. We’ve never heard a frontline caregiver say, “Gosh, our HIT system is just so awesome — it’s so intuitive, easy to use, and safe for our patients.” On the other side of the fence, our data tells us our information technology (IT) colleagues are paralyzed by the sheer volume of (legitimate) frontline complaints (“tickets”), often with no way to categorize, prioritize, and track what issues are creating real safety risks, or which HIT usability issue is costing 10’s or even 100’s of thousands of dollars per year in lost efficiency. It’s for these reasons we created SafeHIT™, a mobile, SaaS-based application for real-time, frontline reporting and advanced analytics of HIT safety, usability, & workflow issues. SafeHIT brings the clinical and IT folks together collaboratively to solve HIT problems, leveraging in-App, bi-directional, highly secure communication.

Question #3: How can companies like The Breakaway Group and Sociotechnologix work together to improve patient safety?

Heather: Both organizations are passionate about improving patient safety through research-based solutions.  We understand patient safety is a complex issue that must be addressed from multiple touch points in the organization.  By pairing our solutions, an organization can address safety across the care continuum – from the leadership culture of safety to how providers use technology to deliver the highest quality of care.

Michael: Heather is spot-on. Sociotechnologix talks about EHR ROS – return on safety – an EHR system that actually helps the entire sociotechnical environment (culture, processes, and technology) be safer. Combining the methodologies and data streams from The Breakaway Group and Sociotechnologix creates a truly unique — and frankly, for the first time — complete approach to not just the initial EHR implementation, but ongoing and sustained EHR proficiency, safety, usability, and workflow optimization, while stopping the pandemic, ongoing lost efficiency costs associated with sub-optimal adoption and usability.

Many government organizations and institutions have also recognized the need to evaluate health IT’s role in patient safety over the last few years. The ONC has funded numerous reports and projects for this very reason and holds meetings with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to coordinate health IT and patient safety.  AHRQ has recently awarded $4 million in new research grants to improve the safety of health IT. More information can be found at

Focusing on processes to ensure better use of health IT, from the true adoption of applications to how they are being used in real time and what issues arise, will make us all safer and provide a better patient experience. The right intentions have been there for 50 years.  We’ve had successes and growth, and are getting better at defining the needs of patients, providers, and organizations to reach the ultimate goal of safety.

Xerox is a sponsor of the Breakaway Thinking series of blog posts. The Breakaway Group is a leader in EHR and Health IT training.

Interoperability of Electronic Health Records– Benefits and Opportunities – Breakaway Thinking

Posted on June 17, 2015 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Jennifer Bergeron, Learning and Development Manager at The Breakaway Group (A Xerox Company). Check out all of the blog posts in the Breakaway Thinking series.
Jennifer Bergeron
Electronic health records (EHR) aim to improve healthcare and processes for providers and patients on a number of fronts. In an ideal situation according to, the clinician benefits by having quick access to patient records and alerts, the ability to quickly and accurately report, and a path to safer prescribing. Patients should be able to spend less time filling out duplicative forms at clinics, have prescriptions sent automatically to pharmacies, and gain easier access to specialist referrals.

The International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies points out that interoperability can work toward a resolution to several current problems including patient record accessibility and consolidation, and healthcare costs. As far as getting patient information and all available information when it’s needed, the report “estimated that 18% of medical errors that result in an adverse drug event were due to inadequate availability of patients’ information.” Healthcare costs are reduced when different entities can share and communicate common data and could save up to $77.8 billion annually.

Given the potential benefits, there are still opportunities to achieve interoperability. For example, not all healthcare organizations are using EHRs so data isn’t being collected consistently across the board. In 2014 there was an increase in the percentage of hospitals with EHRs. However, only 39% of physicians reported that they share data with other providers. Even though the data is available to share, some EHR users may still be living in a silo and haven’t reached full adoption. In addition, existing specification standards have not promoted interoperability. Even though there is data is available to share, few providers are tapping into that information.

To help increase data sharing, more attention is being paid to FHIR, or Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources. FHIR stems from HL7 (Health Level Seven) data exchange and information modeling standards. HL7 has been around since 1987 to develop families of standards used to automate healthcare data sharing with the goal to improve patient care. FHIR builds upon the interoperability uses of HL7 and takes into consideration the changes in technology and requirements. According to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), FHIR is used to enable data access, is used as the container to return query results, and will be used to build necessary security and privacy controls.

FHIR combines what are called “resources” — also known as an instance of data – that define data and are used for specific content. Within a resource are characteristics including “a common way to define and represent them, building them from data types that define common reusable patterns of elements, a common set of metadata, and a human readable part.” Collected data can be used and exchanged, searched for individually or in groupings, analyzed and examined.

Interoperability and the role of FHIR is not yet clearly defined. Going forward, the roadmap for interoperability built by the ONC will be watched closely. Guidelines are broad at this point to allow appropriate decision-making as paths are forged. A group of organizations called the Argonaut Project has committed to working with FHIR. defines the Argonaut Project as having the purpose of developing “a first-generation API (application programming interface) and Core Data Services specification to enable expanded information sharing for electronic health records, documents, and other health information based on the FHIR specification.”

APIs are at work behind the scenes when we’re accessing information online. Although healthcare is beginning to harness the power of APIs these interfaces are present everywhere in our day-to-day lives. For example, say you are listening to Spotify and want to connect that application with Facebook. An API helps make that translation of information from Spotify to Facebook happen.  Imagine the possibilities in the realm of data and healthcare. The development of APIs by the Argonaut Project is just the beginning stages of data sharing and interoperability.

In order to reach true interoperability and efficient use of FHIR, the first step is EHR adoption. Once data is captured into an EHR system, organizations can focus on data standards and clear data management, and have the ability to measure impacts to healthcare patients, providers, costs, and communication. Without the right, accurate data input, interpretation at the end of the process is not accurate or actionable. If clinicians are aware of how their engagement with data and proper input at the beginning of this process affects their practice, their patient’s experience and health, and healthcare on a broad spectrum, they can make a difference well into the future.

Xerox is a sponsor of the Breakaway Thinking series of blog posts. The Breakaway Group is a leader in EHR and Health IT training.

Healthcare Applies Innovation from Other Industries for Big Impact – Breakaway Thinking

Posted on March 18, 2015 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Jennifer Bergeron, Learning and Development Manager at The Breakaway Group (A Xerox Company). Check out all of the blog posts in the Breakaway Thinking series.
Jennifer Bergeron

Healthcare is applying innovations from other industries to make advancements in the study of disease, surgery, and research. If you’re fascinated by new ways to use everyday tools and at the same time make life easier, also known as lifehacks, you can appreciate the same concept in healthcare.

3D imaging, cellphone camera technology, and sonograms like those used in underwater navigation are all being used in healthcare. Let’s begin with a look at cellphone technology and one way it is being applied to healthcare.

UCLA researchers developed a lens-free microscope that, through a series of steps, allows tissue samples to be formed into a 3D image using a microchip that is the same type found in your cellphone camera. The image shows contrast so the researcher can see tissue depth. This lens-free microscope also offers a broader, clearer view than conventional microscopes. The result is that “the pathologist’s diagnosis using the lens-free microscopic images proved accurate 99% of the time”, according to a recent study.   In order to apply this same concept to disease, imagine that a researcher could isolate a section of diseased tissue, remove it from its environment, color code the tissue to easily spot abnormalities, and have the ability to study it from all angles. reminds us that lasers, used in missile defense, in the world’s fastest camera (which takes 6.1 million pictures per second), in entertainment devices such as Blu-ray players, and in grocery check-out lines, are also used in surgery and diagnoses. Lasers can decrease the diagnosis time and cause less disruption to a patient’s comfort. Zero-dilation Scanning Laser Opthmalogy (cSLO), a new imaging technique, can diagnose a patient with diabetic retinopathy, which causes progressive damage to the retina, in as little as 3 minutes.

Technology is not only impacting the patient experience, but how caregivers are brought up to speed on new technologies. In fact, the founder of The Breakaway Group based the company’s electronic health record (EHR) learning concept on flight simulation. Flight simulators train pilots how to maneuver in extreme circumstances, situations that would be difficult to create in real life. At The Breakaway Group, we use simulation technology to increase adoption of EHRs by training providers, nurses, and healthcare professionals.

Speed to proficiency, one of four key adoption elements of The Breakaway Method, provides learners with real-life situations in a safe environment.  Learners can quickly experience many different circumstances, fail, and learn to complete tasks correctly, all without affecting patient outcomes. In addition, The Breakaway Group can cut classroom time in half on average by using simulations.

Healthcare is reaching into other industries to become more efficient and effective. Whenever information is shared and innovations are repurposed to make a process better, we all benefit.

Xerox is a sponsor of the Breakaway Thinking series of blog posts. The Breakaway Group is a leader in EHR and Health IT training.

Measuring Steps to Patient Empowerment – Breakaway Thinking

Posted on November 19, 2014 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Jennifer Bergeron, Learning and Development Manager at The Breakaway Group (A Xerox Company). Check out all of the blog posts in the Breakaway Thinking series.
Jennifer Bergeron

Trends and fads come and go. When they stick, it’s clear they address a consumer need, whether it’s a service, promise, or hope. Here at The Breakaway Group, A Xerox Company (TBG), we operate within a proven methodology that includes metrics, and it’s exciting to those of us who can’t get enough of good data. Most people find metrics interesting, especially when they understand how it relates to them, and the results are something they can control. Metrics are powerful.

To understand the power of data in shaping behaviors, consider the popularity of the self-monitoring fitness tracker or wearable technology. Even as their accuracy is scrutinized, sales in 2014 are predicted to land somewhere in the $14 billion range.1 Do mobile fitness trackers actually help people change their activity habits? Could doctors actually use the data to help their patients? Can companies be built on the concept of improving health with a wearable device? Not conclusively.2 Does a dedicated athlete need this kind of information? Some think not.3

So what is driving the growth of the fitness tracker market and what are these devices offering that creates millions of dedicated users? The answer is real-time data, personalized goals and feedback, and a sense of control; in other words, empowerment.

In the 70s and 80s, my grandparents spoke about their doctor as though he were infallible. They didn’t doubt, question, or even note what he prescribed, but took his advice and dealt with the outcomes. If healing didn’t progress as planned, my grandmother blamed herself, as though she’d failed him.

Jump ahead a few decades when more emphasis is being placed on collaboration. We expect our physicians to work with us, rather than dictate our treatment decisions.4 Section 3506 of the Affordable Care Act, the Program to Facilitate Shared Decision Making, states that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is “required to establish a program that develops, tests and disseminates certificated patient decision aids.”5 The intent is to provide patients and caregivers educational materials that will help improve communication about treatment options and decisions.6

Patient portals are important tools in helping to build this foundation of shared information. The portals house and track patient health data on web-based platforms, enabling patients and physicians to easily collaborate on the patient’s health management.7  Use of patient portals is a Meaningful Use Stage 2 objective.

The first measure of meeting this objective states that more than half the patients seen during a specified Electronic Health Record reporting period must have online access to their records. The second measure puts the spotlight on the patient and their use of that web-based information. MU Stage 2 requires that more than 5% of a provider’s patients must have viewed, downloaded, or transmitted their information to another provider in order for the provider to qualify for financial incentives from the Federal government.8

Empowered consumers want information immediately, whether it’s a restaurant review, number of steps taken in the last hour, how many calories they’ve burned, or their most recent checkup results. We like to weigh the input, make a decision, and then take action. Learning and information intake, no matter the topic, is expected to happen fast.

Metrics show us where we stand and how far we’ve come, which empowers us to keep going or make a change, and then measure again. We’re in an age of wanting to know but also wanting to know what to do next. The wearable device market has met a very real need of consumers. Whether or not fitness trackers make us healthier, whether or not our doctors know what to do with the information, or if this is information an athlete would really use, these devices can serve the purpose of putting many people in control of their own health, one measurable step at a time.

1 Harrop, D., Das, R., & Chansin G. (2014) . Wearable technology 2014-2024: Technologies, markets, forecasts. Retrieved from

2 Hixon, T. (2014) . Are health and fitness wearables running out of gas? Retrieved from

3 Real athletes don’t need wearable tech. (2014) . Retrieved from

4 Chen, P. (2012) . Afraid to speak up at the doctor’s office. Retrieved from

5 Informed Medical Decisions Foundation. (2011-2014) .  Affordable care act. Retrieved from

6 HealthcareITNews. (2014) . Patient pjortals. Retrieved from

7 Bajarin, T. (2014) . Where wearable health gadgets are headed. Retrieved from

8 (2014) . Patient ability to electronically view, download & transmit (VDT) health information. Retrieved from

Xerox is a sponsor of the Breakaway Thinking series of blog posts. The Breakaway Group is a leader in EHR and Health IT training.

Why You Should Stage Patient Portal Implementations

Posted on August 13, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the 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 and 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 response to a discussion I started on LinkedIn about the 4 Things Your Patient Portal Should Include, Travis Moore, MBA, RN, VP at MEDSEEK, added some really great insight into how to have a successful patient portal implementation:

I agree with your assessment on trying to do too much. While many portals on the market, including MEDSEEK’s Empower Patient Portal offer a variety of features, what we at MEDSEEK have found is that it is best to roll out with a subset of features vs. the “big bang” approach for two major reasons. One, you don’t want to overwhelm patients with too many features, as they don’t end up using the “essential” ones appropriately to better activate them in their care. It’s like buying the SLR camera that does 100 things. Reality is, you use 3 of the features for a period of time to get the job done, but then over time, you get comfortable and want to take on more because you take a class, a friend teaches you, etc., and your photos become even better. Same for patient portals, you have to have the features available for future use to further enhance the experience, but roll them out methodically.

And two, many organizations just can’t handle the “do everything at once” deployment, operationally speaking. It’s not a technology “thing”, it’s an operational and cultural issue. I can say from first hand experience as Nurse on both the usage, and deployment end, you have to deploy these patient engagement tools in chunks because if your front line personnel, nurses, aren’t able to clearly articulate to the patient what value it will bring to them when they access it, patients are less likely to use the variety of features in a patient portal. And to Mike’s point about a comprehensive view, that’s exactly why an Enterprise solution is required to bring all of that data together into one view for the patient….and with ACOs, the importance of the enterprise access is even more critical. Patient’s don’t know or care what EMRs, scheduling, or billing systems an HCO has, they just want the “Expedia or Banking-like” experience to see and act upon the information regardless of the source system. It is also critical moving forward that interactive plans of care are accessible and actionable for the patients, and / or their family members, to better engage and activate patients in their care where they spend most of their time, outside the four walls of the organization.

I like the idea of a staged portal implementation. Unfortunately, sometimes that’s not possible since some patient portals are an all or nothing exercise. Plus, meaningful use has accelerated so many implementations. It’s too bad, because there’s real value in staged deployments. The beauty of staged deployments is that once you roll out a few features, then people are interested in what else you can roll out. I’ve seen this same principle work in staged EHR implementations as well. Of course, that provides the added challenge of being ready to roll out the rest of the features as well. Otherwise, you end up with unhappy end users.

Eyes Wide Shut – Patient Engagement Pitfalls Prior to Meaningful Use Reporting Period

Posted on June 30, 2014 I Written By

Mandi Bishop is a hardcore health data geek with a Master's in English and a passion for big data analytics, which she brings to her role as Dell Health’s Analytics Solutions Lead. She fell in love with her PCjr at 9 when she learned to program in BASIC. Individual accountability zealot, patient engagement advocate, innovation lover and ceaseless dreamer. Relentless in pursuit of answers to the question: "How do we GET there from here?" More byte-sized commentary on Twitter: @MandiBPro.

July 1, 2015 – the start of the Meaningful Use Stage 1 Year 2 reporting period for the hospital facilities within this provider integrated delivery network (IDN). The day the 50% online access measure gets real. The day the inpatient summary CCDA MUST be made available online within 36 hours of discharge. The day we must overcome a steady 65% patient portal decline rate.

A quick recap for those who haven’t followed this series (and refresher for those who have): this IDN has multiple hospital facilities, primary care, and specialty practices, on disparate EMRs, all connecting to an HIE and one enterprise patient portal. There are 8 primary EMRs and more than 20 distinct patient identification (MRN) pools. And many entities within this IDN are attempting to attest to Meaningful Use Stage 2 this year.

For the purposes of this post, I’m ignoring CMS and the ONC’s new proposed rule that would, if adopted, allow entities to attest to Meaningful Use Stage 1 OR 2 measures, using 2011 OR 2014 CEHRT (or some combination thereof). Even if the proposed rule were sensible, it came too late for the hospitals which must start their reporting period in the third calendar quarter of 2014 in order to complete before the start of the fiscal year on October 1. For this IDN, the proposed rule isn’t changing anything.

Believe me, I would have welcomed change.

The purpose of the so-called “patient engagement” core measures is just that: engage patients in their healthcare, and liberate the data so that patients are empowered to have meaningful conversations with their providers, and to make informed health decisions. The intent is a good one. The result of releasing the EMR’s compilation of chart data to recently-discharged patients may not be.

I answered the phone on a Saturday, while standing in the middle of a shopping mall with my 12 year-old daughter, to discover a distraught man and one of my help desk representatives on the line. The man’s wife had been recently released from the hospital; they had been provided patient portal access to receive and review her records, and they were bewildered by the information given. The medications listed on the document were not the same as those his wife regularly takes, the lab section did not have any context provided for why the tests were ordered or what the results mean, there were a number of lab results missing that he knew had been performed, and the problems list did not seem to have any correlation to the diagnoses provided for the encounter.

Just the kind of call an IT geek wants to receive.

How do you explain to an 84 year-old man that his wife’s inpatient summary record contains only a snapshot of the information that was captured during that specific hospital encounter, by resources at each point in the patient experience, with widely-varied roles and educational backgrounds, with varied attention to detail, and only a vague awareness of how that information would then be pulled together and presented by technology that was built to meet the bare minimum standards for perfect-world test scenarios required by government mandates?

How do you tell him that the lab results are only what was available at time of discharge, not the pathology reports that had to be sent out for analysis and would not come back in time to meet the 36-hour deadline?

How do you tell him that the reasons there are so many discrepancies between what he sees on the document and what is available on the full chart are data entry errors, new workflow processes that have not yet been widely adopted by each member of the care team, and technical differences between EMRs in the interpretation of the IHE’s XML standards for how these CCDA documents were to be created?

EMR vendors have responded to that last question with, “If you use our tethered portal, you won’t have that problem. Our portal can present the data from our CCDA just fine.” But this doesn’t take into account the patient experience. As a consumer, I ask you: would you use online banking if you had to sign on to a different website, with a different username and password, for each account within the same bank? Why should it be acceptable for managing health information online to be less convenient than managing financial information?

How do hospital clinical and IT staff navigate this increasingly-frequent scenario that is occurring: explaining the data that patients now see?

I’m working hard to establish a clear delineation between answering technical and clinical questions, because I am not – by any stretch of the imagination – a clinician. I can explain deviations in the records presentation, I can explain the data that is and is not available – and why (which is NOT generally well-received), and I can explain the logical processes for patients to get their clinical questions answered.

Solving the other half of this equation – clinicians who understand the technical nuances which have become patient-facing, and who incorporate that knowledge into regular patient engagement to insure patients understand the limitations of their newly-liberated data – proves more challenging. In order to engage patients in the way the CMS Meaningful Use program mandates, have we effectively created a new hybrid role requirement for our healthcare providers?

And what fresh new hell have we created for some patients who seek wisdom from all this information they’ve been given?

Caveat – if you’re reading this, it’s likely you’re not the kind of patient who needs much explaining. You’re likely to do your own research on the data that’s presented on your CCDA outputs, and you have the context of the entire Meaningful Use initiative to understand why information is presented the way it is. But think – can your grandma read it and understand it on HER own?