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!!

HIMSS Analytics Clinical & BI Maturity Model

Written by:

While the theme of HIMSS 2013 may have been, “How Great Is Interoperability,” the effectiveness of the many facets of interoperability are only as good as the actionable value of the shared data. The clinical insights that should be enabled by Meaningful Use Stage 2+ are expected to drive market trends in myriad areas of the healthcare system: chronic disease management, targeted member interventions, quality measures. In order to assess organizational readiness to capitalize on the promise of Meaningful Use, HIMSS Analytics began measuring the implementation and adoption of EMR and clinical documentation using a maturity model called EMRAM.

EMRAM

But, in analytics terms, EMRAM’s results are simply targeted foundational reporting, answering the question, “WHAT happened with Meaningful Use EMR adoption criteria.” So, you’ve got your clinical data in an EMR. Now what are you able to DO with it?

In 2013, HIMSS Analytics is taking a broader approach with the introduction of a new Clinical Business Intelligence maturity model, creating a framework to benchmark participating providers’ analytics maturity level.

I’ve been fortunate to know James Gaston, Senior Director of HIMSS Analytics Clinical & Business Intelligence, for many years, going back to his days with Arkansas Blue Cross. His appreciation for BI initiatives is matched only by his enthusiasm for the first day of turkey hunting season. When I ran into him at TDWI’s BI World summit in Orlando in November, he acted like a kid on Christmas morning, telling me about the brave new world of clinical data management that he was about to tackle. The excitement continued to build in the months leading up to HIMSS. James was practically glowing when we spoke about the upcoming C&BI Maturity Model release.

“Our customers are interested in not just understanding how to deploy IT applications, but how effectively they’re using those applications to support clinical business intelligence, as well as analytical pursuits,” James said. “So, HIMSS Analytics partnered with IIA to create and present a Clinical & BI Maturity Model that helps healthcare organizations measure that level of effectiveness.”

Sarah Gates, the VP of Research for IIA (the International Institute of Analytics), elaborated. “The HIMSS Analytics C&BI Maturity Model leverages the Competing on Analytics DELTA model, developed by Tom Davenport, which measures not only how well you’re using data and technology, but how well you’re building an analytical organization.” There are 5 core competency measurements in the DELTA model that will inform the HIMSS Analytics C&BI analysis: Data, Enterprise, Leadership, Targets, and Analysts. The methodology is holistic, touching on the cultural aspects of the organization as well as the technical, allowing a longitudinal view of the organization’s analytics program. A yardstick value from 1-5 will be assigned to each respondent based on Davenport’s criteria for each core competency.

Although HIMSS Analytics will eventually offer Level 1-5 certification program for those organizations with observed results for analytics, James and Sarah agreed that it is not appropriate for every provider to reach for the Level 5 gold star. Per Sarah, “Healthcare is an industry just starting to discover analytics. We’re expecting to see lots of practitioners that are emerging in use of analytics, so we believe it (survey results) will be heavy on the lower end of the maturity scale. Data warehouse capabilities and staffing career paths for data analysts will be key differentiators for mature programs.” Not all providers have the resources – financial, human, and/or technical – to attain advanced analytics nirvana, and James wants to insure that these providers don’t feel as if they’ve “failed”; the goal is to baseline against the peer group, identify opportunities for improvement, and focus on what is possible for each individual organization, working within their constraints.

What can we expect to see at next year’s C&BI survey results presentation? James said, “We want to be able to talk about benchmarking the industry as a whole, helping healthcare find its way with clinical business intelligence and begin to understand how important it is, and where opportunities lie Everyone’s talking about clinical and BI – it is the opportunity to realize savings in healthcare, to use information to empower people to make better decisions.”

So, it’s up to you, providers and technology partners. You’ve implemented your EMR, achieved a high adoption rate across your organization’s core clinical processes, attested to Meaningful Use Stage 2, achieved Stage 7 on the HIMSS EMRAM scale, perhaps even participated in multi-HIE CCD medical records sharing with other provider networks. You’ve got the data in-house and availabe. It’s time to see how ready you are to rise to the analytics challenge and maximize your return on those EMR and HIE investments.

Attempt to beat your previous Doug Fridsma long jump.

Note: for the complete HIMSS 2013 Leadership Survey Results, please download PDF here.

March 14, 2013 I Written By

Mandi Bishop is a healthcare IT consultant and a hardcore data geek with a Master's in English and a passion for big data analytics, who 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.

Interoperability: The High Jump and The Long Jump with ONC’s Doug Fridsma

Written by:

I’ll admit, I was incredibly nervous about interviewing Dr. Doug Fridsma, the Chief Science Officer for the Office of the National Coordinator and the face of both the Standards and Interoperability (S&I) Framework and the Federal Health Architecture initiative. Not only do I consider him a key luminary, but his overarching responsibility for the future of interoperability and standards-based programs is incredibly alluring. I swoon over those who have the power and desire to effect meaningful, positive change on a grand scale. I wasn’t disappointed.

Doug explained his philosophy towards fulfilling the promise of interoperability with a sports metaphor: the high jump and the long jump.

“I don’t like high jumps,” he said. “High jumps, if you knock down the bar, you’re done and you get no points. Long jumps, you get points for each increment. The high jump for interoperability is ubiquitous data liquidity. The long jump is Meaningful Use.”

The S&I Framework project is tracking progress towards standardization and standards adoption across 5 areas of Meaningful Use and interoperability:

  1. Meaning – shared vocabularies across continuum of care
  2. Structure of messages shared across continuum of care
  3. Transport of messages
  4. Security of transport and messages
  5. Services for accessing messages

All of these categories are exemplified in the flagship project for Meaningful Use and interoperability: the Automate Blue Button Initiative, affectionately known as ABBI. For those not familiar with ABBI, do an experiment: ask your primary care provider whether you can visit a patient portal and download your medical records by clicking the “Blue Button.” If your PCP can provide you the website link to request the download, you should be able to receive your entire medical record (from that provider) in a vaguely huma-readable format (Excel, Word, PDF, etc.). The medical and clinical jargon may not make a lot of sense; however, it’s certainly an incremental hop in the long jump towards interoperability and standards adoption. The standard vocabularies, structure, transport mechanism, security protocol, and web-enabled access are foundational building blocks which enable the Blue Button program’s adoption.

Doug’s goal with the ABBI program was three-fold: get it OUT there, have providers and patients start USING it, and structure it so that it can be repeatable and scalable. Patient engagement advocates across the Twittersphere applaud the sentiment that we, patients, should have ownership of our health data, and many recognize the ONC’s efforts as instrumental in turning the tide for patient access. Several notable bloggers have covered the ABBI project in detail, analyzing its value to healthcare IT development professionals, providers, and patients, including:
Keith Boone @motorcycle_guy – the ABBI Pitch, with a quick overview of the goals for the program, and humorous insight into providers’ qualms about adoption

Greg Meyer @greg_meyer – Scalable Trust and Trust Bundles, with developer-focused details on the structure and transport categories of interoperability

For the next incremental long jump beyond ABBI and Meaningful Use Stage 2, Doug Fridsma and the ONC have several new initiatives tackling the atomic-level data governance and quality of clinical information. In order to communicate between disparate EHR systems, across multiple facilities and potentially multiple payers, it isn’t just the structure of the container and transport of the message that must be consistent: it’s the individual data elements, themselves, which comprise the meat of the message that must be standardized.

The ONC recently announced the Structured Data Capture Initiative with the goal of creating a technical infrastructure to support “structurally sound” standard data elements with support for “unique semantics”, to capture EHR and supplemental clinical data for use across the continuum of care. This effort officially kicked off the week of HIMSS 2013; its progress will be instrumental in broadening the effectiveness of interoperability and Meaningful Use.

So, as I walk the Interoperability Showcase at HIMSS13, watch the use case demonstrations, and ask the participants the tough questions like, “How are you incorporating the use case development you’re exhibiting here into consideration for your next product full release,” I’ll be taking note of those organizations that seem focused on the next incremental jump towards patient-centric, data-driven healthcare systems. And I’ll be wondering what Doug Fridsma and the ONC will do to get to the next incremental jump on the way to the nirvana of ubiquitous data liquidity.

…I’ll also be kicking myself for not taking the opportunity to get a fan photo with Doug while I had the chance.

March 5, 2013 I Written By

Mandi Bishop is a healthcare IT consultant and a hardcore data geek with a Master's in English and a passion for big data analytics, who 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.

CommonWell Health Alliance – The Healthcare Interoperability Enabler?

Written by:

The biggest news that will likely come out of HIMSS was the big announcement that was made about the newly formed CommonWell Health Alliance. They’ve also rolled out a website for the new organization.

This was originally billed as a Cerner and McKesson announcement and would be a unique announcement from both the CEO of Cerner and McKesson. Of course, the news of what would be announced was leaked well before the press briefing, so we basically already knew that these two EHR companies were working on interoperability.

In what seemed like some final, last minute deals for some of the companies, 5 different software products were represented on stage at the press event announcement for CommonWell Health Alliance. The press event was quite entertaining as each of the various CEOs took some friendly jabs at each other.

Of course, Jonathan Bush stole the show (which is guaranteed to happen if he’s on stage). I think it was Neal Patterson who called Jonathan Bush the most articulate CEO in healthcare and possibly in any industry. Jonathan does definitely have a way with words.

One of Jonathan’s best quote was in response to a question of whether the CommonWell Health Alliance would just be open to any health IT software system, or whether it was just creating another closed garden. Jonathan replied that “even a vendor of epic proportions” would be welcome in the organization. Don Fluckinger from Search Health IT News, decided to ask directly if Judy from Epic had been asked about the alliance and what she said. They adeptly avoided answering the question specifically and instead said that they’d talked to a lot of EHR vendors and were happy to talk to any and all.

Although, this is still the core question that has yet to be answered by the CommonWell Health Alliance. Will it just be another closed garden (albeit with a few more vendors inside the closed garden)? From what I could gather from the press conference, their intent is to make it available to anyone and everyone. This would even include vendors that don’t do EHR. I think their intent is good.

What I’m not so sure about is whether they’ll put up artificial barriers to entry that stop an innovative startup company from participating. This is what was done with EHR certification when it was started. The price was so high that it made no sense for a small EHR vendor to participate. They could have certified as well, but the cost to become certified was so high that it created an artificial barrier to participation for many EHR vendors. Will similar barriers be put up in the CommonWell Health Alliance? Time will tell.

With this said, I think it is a step forward. The direction of working to share data is the right one. I hope the details don’t ruin the intent and direction they’re heading. Plus, the website even says they’re going to do a pretty lengthy pilot period to implement the interoperability. Let’s hope that pilot period doesn’t keep getting extended and extended.

Finally, I loved when Jonathan Bush explained that there were plenty of other points of competition that he was glad that creating a closed garden won’t be one of them. I hope that vision is really achieved. If so, then it will be a real healthcare interoperability enabler. Although, artificially shutting out innovative healthcare IT companies would make it a healthcare interoperability killer.

March 4, 2013 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

Additional EMR Regulations – Good or Bad?

Written by:

Suppose the DMV added 1000 new rules to driving. Would that make driving saver? Would that help the police write better tickets? It would help the regulatory bodies better split hairs. It would allow more and bigger DMV offices.

I got the above comment emailed to me by Paul Lund who subscribes to the EMR and HIPAA email list. It’s an interesting comment and EMR and healthcare can likely learn from the rules of the road. I think the biggest challenge is that we seem to all understand about driving and the issues related to driving. In healthcare, we all think we know about the challenges of healthcare, but it’s often much more complex.

As I think of the analogy of driving to EMR, I agree with the general idea that less EMR regulation is better than more EMR regulation. For example, have we seen a measurable benefit from all of the EHR certification or meaningful use regulation>? I have yet to see it, but could point to plenty of areas where the EHR certification and MU regulations have caused a negative to healthcare.

However, just like in driving, I don’t think there should be no regulation at all of EMR and EHR software. As usual, I have a much more nuanced view. Can you imagine driving with no rules? The odd thing is that in some ways that’s what it feels like in EMR today.

A simple example is having a true standard for EMR interoperability. I’ve long wished that the EHR incentive money focused exclusively on this challenge. It’s a place where an adopted and supported standard for EHR data could really benefit the community. Plus, holding EHR vendors, hospitals, HIEs, and physician offices to that standard could be a real benefit. Right now every EMR seems to be doing what they want. Yes, we have CCD, but try transferring a CCD from one EMR to another right now. It’s a mess of multiple versions and challenging delivery. Works great in the HIMSS interoperability showcase, but somehow isn’t getting translated to real work.

Is it too much to ask for meaningful EMR regulation and nothing more?

January 15, 2013 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

EHR Vendors and ONC Need to Rebrand CCD

Written by:

A really interesting point came out of the discussion in the comments of my post titled “What Information an HIE Should Pass?” Here’s one of my responses:

I think what you describe is that the branding of the CCD isn’t right for doctors. Instead of saying that they can get a CCD document from a doctor which sounds technical and scary they need to hear that they’re going to get an “Electronic Note” transferred from a doctor. If in reality that’s a CCD document that gets converted into a beautifully displayed “note” for the doctor, they don’t really care. That’s semantics which don’t matter to them. Your “football” naming goes towards these same lines, but I think that actually naming it a “football” will confuse doctors more. It works great as a way to describe what’s happening, but they’d get lost wondering how football had to do with a note. I actually think this is an important point that’s worthy of its own blog post.

Of course this discussion is really about branding and communication. It’s not about the technical details of a CCD (Continuity of Care Document) document (That’s a topic for another discussion). I believe the problem probably lies in the fact that most of the technical people I know behind standards like CCD are more worried about the technical details and don’t realize the importance of how those technical details translate for those not entrenched in the standards creation.

Most of them know the ins and outs of CCD so well that many probably don’t realize that those outside of the standards creation really don’t have a clue of the realities of what CCD will do for them. Even just saying the name CCD starts the confusion for many. Certainly there are exceptions to this, but most doctors couldn’t care less about the standards details.

Here’s something a physician understands:
Your physician notes are being transferred to another doctor.
or
You’re receiving physician notes from another doctor.

What they have a hard time processing is:
You can send a CCD document to another doctor.
or
You’ve got a CCD document from another doctor.

Sure, there are subtle nuances between physician note and CCD, but those can be communicated as well. Maybe physician note isn’t the exact right word either, but I think it gets closer to communicating what’s really happening then saying a CCD document.

Regardless, we need to do a better job communicating what’s happening. I know a lot of doctors that would love to transfer a physician note. I don’t know many that care about CCD documents.

April 18, 2012 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

Problems with ARRA EMR Stimulus Money

Written by:

I recently read a Healthcare IT article that talks about some of the challenges with the EMR stimulus money. Here’s a couple of the challenges discussed with my commentary.

Albert L. Strunk, MD, representing the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said ACOG is concerned that the measures, while clinical in nature, are not related to adoption of electronic medical records. “The meaningful use measures for ARRA should determine whether a physician has met the objectives shown in the meaningful use matrix, not whether the EMR is being used to report clinical quality measures that rarely apply to that physician’s patients,” he said.

I think this is an interesting analysis. Clinical quality measures are one of the main goals of having an EMR. However, very few doctors look at it that way. I think they will get the incentives wrong if they focus on the clinical quality measures and not on the features of an EMR that benefit the doctor. I’m still sticking with my original analysis that the government really wants doctors to have an EMR so they can improve the Medicare reimbursement rates (in their favor of course).

Another section about interoperable EMR software:

Experts at the hearing testified that providers are willing to wait to purchase a HIT system until they know it will be interoperable. They said physicians from small practices often interact with more than five community hospitals and several labs, each with a different system. Doctors need to know that whatever electronic health record they buy will work with the systems the labs and hospitals have.

I don’t personally get the feeling that most doctors care about interoperability when making their EMR selection. Ok, let me clarify. They want it to connect with their lab and hospital. However, most don’t worry about it interacting with other doctors offices in a true interoperable fashion. The problem is that interoperability between a doctors office and hospitals/labs is not the same as what most people consider an interoperable EMR. I’m talking about EMR software talking to other EMR software (or an RHIO or HIE). Most doctors don’t care about this. At least not more than all the other financial issues related to EMR.

November 16, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

Healthcare Data Sharing in EMR Software

Written by:

Healthcare data sharing is one of the hottest topics when talking about the importance of EMR software. Some people call it healthcare data portability. One of the problems I have with these discussions is that everyone has different goals for why they want to share the information. Here’s a partial list of reasons people may want to share healthcare data between various EMR respositories (in no particular order):

  • Clinical data sharing for reimbursement purposes
  • Quality data sharing for broader research goals
  • Quality data sharing to meet ARRA requirements/reimbursement
  • Data shared for continuity of care between providers

There are probably other reasons to have EMR software be able to share clinical data. However, you get the basic point. There are a lot of reasons why people want the ability to share healthcare related data from an EMR. One problem in the discussion of EMR data portability is that the conversation often gets convoluted when clear lines aren’t drawn for why the EMR data is being shared. Kind of reminds me of what it’s like to discuss EMR and not differentiate between a hospital EMR and ambulatory EMR. There are important similarities, but there are also important differences which always seem to confuse the discussion.

September 15, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

Free Health Information Exchange – HIE

Written by:

One of my readers pointed out that NaviNet was offering their Health Information Exchange (HIE) solution to state governments for free. Here’s a short part of the press release:

NaviNet (formerly NaviMedix), America’s largest real-time healthcare communications network, today announced the NaviNet Health Information Exchange (HIE), a solution that combines the NaviNet Provider Network of more than 770,000 providers nationwide, and NaviNet technology and services. The NaviNet HIE is now available to all state governments and U.S. territories at no cost, enabling more efficient implementation and expansion of local health data exchange. Adoption of NaviNet HIE minimizes technology investment requirements, providing states and territories a rapid and cost-effective way to offer their own branded health information exchange to electronically connect physicians, hospitals, insurers and existing HIEs in their regions. NaviNet is already used by two out of every three U.S. healthcare providers, and leading national, commercial and Blues health plans, resulting in significant costs savings to the industry.

I always find it interesting when someone starts offering something for free. I always have to ask myself the question of why they would offer it for free. I don’t know NaviNet that well, but it seems like this free offering is 2 fold. First, it seems like they probably want to sell the HIE to people other than government. Second, I think that they probably want participants in the HIE to also use NaviNet’s billing services.

What’s really interesting to me also is that it seems like NaviNet is basically a billing company (although, I don’t know them that well). I find this really interesting since I’ve often seen the argument that we’ve been exchanging billing information electronically in healthcare for a while. Since this is the case, many people have wondered why we couldn’t also exchange other healthcare information. Is this offering from NaviNet, the realization of this principle?

Free EMR has been going well for a while. We’ll see how Free HIE goes.

August 31, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

Patient’s Demanding Interoperable EHR

Written by:

A few years ago there was this really funny thread over on the EMR Update forum that asked if doctors would one day display a sign that said “Got EMR?” (this was before the term EHR became in vogue) The concept was asking the question about whether patients would ever demand that their doctor us an EMR or they’d go to another doctor for care. The comparison was made to online banking. I remember online banking being on my list of requirements for a bank. Why couldn’t EMR be on your list of requirements for a doctor?

However, I don’t think most patients really know enough about EMR to want their doctor to ask for it. Maybe if EMR companies and independent studies of EMR really showed a stark improvement in patient care by those using an EMR this would change. Until then, don’t expect patients to start requesting doctors that use an EMR.

With that said, patients may start demanding other things which would tangentially require a doctor to use an EMR. For example, a patient may want their doctor to be interoperable. Patients may want to be able to easily schedule an appointment with their doctor online. Patients may want to start getting script refills done online. Of course, we could talk for hours about patients eventually wanting to actually have the patient visits done online, but we won’t start down that path in this post.

Each of the above patient requirements really needs to have an EMR. We’re definitely not at the point now that patients are demanding these types of features. I wonder if we’ll ever reach this point or if there are just so many patients and so few doctors that even if the patients start asking for these features doctors can continue to do business as usual.

June 2, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.

Definition of Meaningful Use

Written by:

We’re all still sitting here waiting for the government to finally decide two key terms in regards to gaining access to the $18 billion in stimulus money in the HITECH act (ARRA). I’ve been interested in the subject myself since before it was even settled that we’d call it meaningful use as opposed to meaningful EMR user. From the looks of that post back in February, there was still a lot of confusion about “meaningful use” and “certified EHR.”

Turns out that a few months later, we still have very little clarification about what these two terms mean. Certified EHR discussion has really revolved around CCHIT certification or some other alternative. We’ll try to leave that discussion for other posts. What has been interesting is in just the past week or two there has been a literal flood of people offering their perspective on meaningful use. Sometimes I like to be on the cutting edge of these definitions (like I was in the link above) and other times I like to sit back and let them play out. This time I’ve been letting it play out and it’s really interesting to see the multitude of perspectives.

I’m not planning on writing my own plan for how they should do meaningful use. I may do that at a later time if so inclined. For now, I’ll just focus on highlighting points from what other people have suggested and provide commentary that will hopefully enhance people’s understanding of this complicated mandate (yes, that means this post will be quite long).

I think it’s reasonable to first point you to the NCVHS hearing on “Meaningful Use” of Health Information Technology. This matters, because at the end of the days hearings like these are where most of the information are going to come. Then, with the information from these hearing decisions will be made. The other sources like blogs won’t carry nearly as much weight (although it’s unfortunate that more politicians aren’t listening).

John Chilmark on Meaningful Use
Next, I’ll go to one of my newly found favorite bloggers named John Chilmark (any coincidence we’re both named John). John from Chilmark Research commented that HHS is bringing together the “usual suspects” to discuss “meaningful use. Chilmark also states that the following criteria are what’s required for meaningful use:

  1. Electronic Prescribing
  2. Quality Metrics Reporting
  3. Care Coordination

I’m not sure where he got this list, but this list feels kind of weak if you ask me. In fact, John suggests that these requirements will be simple and straightforward and first and then ratcheted-up in future years. Interesting idea to consider. I hope that they do draft the requirements for meaningful use in a way that it can be changed in the future if it turns out to not be producing the results it should be producing.

John Halamka on Meaningful Use
Next up, the famous John (another John) Halamka, Chief of every Health IT thing (at least in Boston), calls defining “meaningful use” “the most critical decision points of the new administration’s healthcare IT efforts.” He’s dead on here. In fact, it might not be the most critical decision for healthcare IT, but for healthcare in general as well. Here’s John Halamka’s prediction for how “meaningful use” will be defined:

My prediction of meaningful use is that it will focus on quality and efficiency. It will require electronic exchange of quality measures including process and outcome metrics. It will require coordination of care through the transmission of clinical summaries. It will require decision support driven medication management with comprehensive eRx implementation (eligibility, formulary, history, drug/drug interaction, routing, refills).

Basically, he’s predicting inter operable EMR software and ePrescribing with a little decision support sprinkled on top. I won’t be surprised if this is close to the final definition. The only thing missing is the reporting that will be required to the government. The government needs this data to fix Medicare and Medicaid (more on that in another post).

Blumenthal Comment to Government Health IT
Government Health IT has a nice quote from David Blumenthal that says: “The forthcoming definition of the “meaningful use” of health information technology will set the direction of the Obama administration’s strategy for health IT adoption, said David Blumenthal, the new national coordinator for health IT.”

I think there’s little doubt that David Blumenthal has a good idea of the importance of the decisions ahead. What should be interesting is to see how involved Obama is in these very important decisions. I’m guessing Obama won’t do much more than sign a paper to make it happen. I just hope I’m wrong.

HIMSS Definition of Meaningful Use
Here’s a short summary of the HIMSS definition of “meaningful use”

According to HIMSS officials, EHR technology is “meaningful” when it has capabilities including e-prescribing, exchanging electronic health information to improve the quality of care, having the capacity to provide clinical decision support to support practitioner order entry and submitting clinical quality measures – and other measures – as selected by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Basically, e-prescribing, interoperability and clinical decision support. Turns out a BNET Healthcare article suggested the same conclusion “The consensus of physician and industry representatives was that meaningful use should include interoperability, the ability to report standard quality measures, and advanced clinical decision-making.”

I think we’re starting to see a bit of a pattern here. I should say that these are all very good things, but the challenge I see is that any requirement needs to be easily and consistently measured. Interoperability and clinical decision support are both very difficult to measure. Just wait until they see the variety of software that tries to do those two things. It’s very difficult to measure it consistently across so many EHR software.

Wow!! I barely even got started on this subject. Instead of belaboring the point, let me just point you to some other interesting readings about the HITECH Act, ARRA, and “meaningful use.”

Please let me know if there are other good sources for perspectives on defining “meaningful use.” This really is a landmark decision for healthcare IT.

May 5, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 5000 articles with John having written over 2000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 9.3 million times. John also recently launched two new companies: InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com, and is an advisor to docBeat. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit.