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!!

Hospitals Aren’t Getting Much ROI From RCM Technology

Posted on July 24, 2017 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.

If your IT investments aren’t paying off, your revenue cycle management process is clunky and consumers are defaulting on their bills, you’re in a pretty rocky situation financially. Unfortunately, that’s just the position hospitals find themselves in lately, according to a new study.

The study, which was conducted by the Healthcare Financial Management Association and Navigant, surveyed 125 hospital health system chief financial officers and revenue cycle executives.

When they looked at the data, researchers saw that hospitals are being hit with a double whammy. On the one hand, the RCM systems hospitals have in place don’t seem to be cutting it, and on the other, the hospitals are struggling to collect from patients.

Nearly three out of four respondents said that their RCM technology budgets were increasing, with 32% reporting that they were increasing spending by 5% or more. Seventy-seven percent of hospitals with less than 100 beds and 78% of hospitals with 100 to 500 beds plan to increase such spending, the survey found.

The hospital leaders expect that technology investments will improve their RCM capabilities, with 79% considering business intelligence analytics, EHR-enabled workflow or reporting, revenue integrity, coding and physician/clinician documentation options.

Unfortunately, the software infrastructure underneath these apps isn’t performing as well as they’d like. Fifty-one percent of respondents said that their organizations had trouble keeping up with EHR upgrades, or weren’t getting the most out of functional, workflow and reporting improvements. Given these obstacles, which limit hospitals’ overall tech capabilities, these execs have little chance of seeing much ROI from RCM investments.

Not only that, CFOs and RCM leaders weren’t sure how much impact existing technology was having on their organizations. In fact, 41% said they didn’t have methods in place to track how effective their technology enhancements have been.

To address RCM issues, hospital leaders are looking beyond technology. Some said they were tightening up their revenue integrity process, which is designed to ensure that coding and charge capture processes work well and pricing for services is reasonable. Such programs are designed to support reliable financial reporting and efficient operations.

Forty-four percent of respondents said their organizations had established revenue integrity programs, and 22% said revenue integrity was a top RCM focus area for the coming year. Meanwhile, execs whose organizations already had revenue integrity programs in place said that the programs offered significant benefits, including increased net collections (68%), greater charge capture (61%) and reduced compliance risks (61%).

Still, even if a hospital has its RCM house in order, that’s far from the only revenue drain it’s likely to face. More than 90% of respondents think the steady increase in consumer responsibility for care will have an impact on their organizations, particularly rural hospital executives, the study found.

In effort to turn the tide, hospital financial execs are making it easier for consumers to pay their bills, with 93% of respondents offering an online payment portal and 63% rolling out cost-of-care estimation tools. But few hospitals are conducting sophisticated collections initiatives. Only 14% of respondents said they were using advanced modeling tools for predicting propensity to pay, researchers said.

Meeting the Patient Where They Are – #HITsm Chat Topic

Posted on July 18, 2017 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’re excited to share the topic and questions for this week’s #HITsm chat happening Friday, 7/21 at Noon ET (9 AM PT). This week’s chat will be hosted by Melody Smith Jones (@MelSmithJones) from HYP3R on the topic of “Meeting the Patient Where They Are.”

Every day, decision-makers across the healthcare industry sit in boardrooms charting the course for the future of patient engagement.

At the same time, individual patients are turning to new sources for health information, researching symptoms online and crowdsourcing answers from friends on social media.

More than ever, healthcare providers need to meet patients where they are.

Join this Twitter chat to explore how healthcare decision-makers can get out of the confines of the boardroom and truly understand the patient experience of today.

Questions we will explore in this week’s #HITsm chat include:
T1: As the healthcare consumer turns away from traditional media & towards digital channels, how can we meet the patient where they are? #HITsm

T2: Since financial literacy and price transparency have a steep learning curve, how can we meet the patient where they are? #HITsm

T3: As healthcare consumers continue to become avid researchers in their own right, how can we meet the patient where they are? #HITsm

T4: As the patient stares blankly at the available patient portal, how can we meet the patient where they are? #HITsm

T5: As patients and families bring digital devices with them into the care setting, how can we meet the patient where they are? #HITsm

Bonus: As the worlds of social media and intelligence continue to merge, how can we meet the patient where they are? #HITsm

Upcoming #HITsm Chat Schedule
7/28 – How Does Age Impact Patient Satisfaction & Provider Switching?
Hosted by Lea Chatham (@leachatham) from @SolutionReach

8/4 – TBD
Hosted by Alan Portela (@AlanWPortela) from Airstrip

8/11 – TBD
Hosted by TBD

8/18 – Diversity in HIT
Hosted by Jeanmarie Loria (@JeanmarieLoria) from @advizehealth

8/25 – TBD
Hosted by TBD

We look forward to learning from the #HITsm community! As always, let us know if you’d like to host a future #HITsm chat or if you know someone you think we should invite to host.

If you’re searching for the latest #HITsm chat, you can always find the latest #HITsm chat and schedule of chats here.

E-Patient Update: Using Digital Health For Collaborative Medication Management

Posted on June 1, 2016 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, I had a medical visit which brought home the gap between how doctors and patients approach to medications. While the physician and his staff seemed focused on updating a checklist of meds, I wanted med education and a chance to ask in-depth self-management questions. And though digital health tools and services could help me achieve these goals, they didn’t seem to be on the medical group’s radar.

At this visit, as I waited to see the doctor, a nurse entered with a laptop on a cart. Consulting her screen, she read off my medication list and item by item, asked me to confirm whether I took the given medication. Then, she asked me to supply the name and dosage of any drugs that weren’t included on the list. Given that I have a few chronic conditions, and take as many as a dozen meds a day, this was an awkward exercise. But I complied as best I could. When a physician saw me later, we discussed only the medication he planned to add to the mix.

While I felt quite comfortable with both the nurse and doctor, I wasn’t satisfied with the way the medication list update was handled. At best, the process was clumsy, and at worst, it might have passed over important information on drug history, interactions and compliance. Also, at least for me, discussing medications was difficult without being able to see the list.

But at least in theory, digital health technology could go a long way toward addressing these issues. For example:

  • If one is available, the practice could use a medication management app which syncs with the EMR it uses. That way, clinicians could see my updates and ask questions as appropriate.
  • Alternatively, the patient should have the opportunity to review their medication list while waiting to be seen, perhaps by using a specialized patient login for an EMR portal. This could be done using a laptop or tablet on a cart similar to what clinicians use.
  • When reviewing their medication list, patients could select medications about which they have questions, delete medications they no longer take and enter meds they’ve started since their last visit.
  • At least for complex cases, patients should have an opportunity to do a telehealth consult with a pharmacist if requested. This would be especially helpful prior to adding new drugs to a patient’s regimen. (I don’t know if such services exist but my interest in them stands.)

To me, using digital health options to help patients manage their meds makes tremendous sense. Now that such tools are available, physicians can loop patients into the med management discussion without having to spend a lot of extra time or money. What’s more, collaboration helps patients manage their own care more effectively over the long term, which will be critical under value-based care. But it may not be easy to convince them that this is a good idea.

Unfortunately, many physicians see sharing any form of patient data as a loss of control. After all, in the past a chart was for doctors, not patients, and in my experience, that dynamic has carried over into the digital world. I have struggled against this — in part by simply asking to look at the EMR screen — but my sense is that many clinicians are afraid I’ll see something untoward, misinterpret a data point or engage in some other form of mischief.

Still, I have vowed to take better control of my medications, and I’m going to ask every physician that treats me to consider digital med management tools. I need them to know that this is what I need. Let’s see if I get anywhere!

Restoring Humanity to Health Care – My Experience Part 2

Posted on February 27, 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.

It seemed appropriate for me to follow up with part 2 of my experience with a new wellness focused medical practice called Turntable Health, an operating partner of Iora Health. In case you missed part 1 of the journey, you can find it here.

Walking into the clinic, there was a different feel. It felt more like walking into a local coffee shop than going for a doctors appointment. The lobby was so inviting that I wondered if some in the community used it as a place to go and work on occasion. I spend a fair amount of time in the Downtown Las Vegas tech community, so it wasn’t a surprise that I actually knew a few of the people in the lobby. So, I was able to connect with some friends while I waited for my appointment.

The check in process was simple and I was invited back by my health coach. In this case the health coach acted very much like an MA or nurse in a regular medical office, but the feel was more friendly an casual. We both knew we had an hour together so there wasn’t the usual frenetic pace the accompanied a doctors office.

I had a couple paper forms to sign (yes, the signature is still often easier on paper), but no major health history to fill out or anything like that. They had a one question survey that I think was about my current state of wellness. Over the hour the health coach did ask many of the questions that would be on a normal health history form and key them into the Iora EHR system. It was a unique approach since it gave me the opportunity to talk about the things as we went through them and many of the things we talked about (ie. my family health history) came up later in my conversation with the doctor.

The exam room looked quite a bit like any other exam room you might visit. The colors and lighting were nice and they had little touches like this local art work display in the exam room (see picture below). It’s kind of interesting to think about a doctor’s office as a kind of local art gallery.

At one point in the conversation with my health coach, we talked a bit about fitness tracking and she quickly emailed me some fitness apps that she liked. Little did she know that I write about such apps and that industry for a living on Smart Phone Healthcare. It also illustrated how much of a need there is for someone to be a trusted content curator of the 30k+ mobile health apps out there. Especially if we want healthcare providers to make a dent in actual usage of these to improve our wellness.

After completing her assessment, my health coach left the room and came back with the doctor. When he came in he told me that my health coach had talked with him about me and my health (in a normal practice this amounts to “Fever in room 3”) and he wanted to talk to me about a few of the issues I was dealing with. When he did this, the doctor and my health coach came into the room and we all sat around a small table. It was almost as if I’d just sat down for hot chocolate (I don’t drink coffee) with my doctor and my health coach.

There were a few differences though. When my doctor sat down he plugged in a chord to display his computer screen (my record) on a big plasma monitor that we could all see. I’m not sure why my health coach didn’t do that too. I almost moved over next to her to watch her enter the data, but I felt like that was just my inner EHR nerd coming out. Plus, I didn’t want her to necessarily know my background in that regard and that I’d be writing about the experience later. I wanted to see what they usually did for patients.

Because we were all sitting around the proverbial exam room “coffee table” I didn’t feel rushed at all. We talked about a couple sports issues I’ve been dealing with and ways that I could make sure they don’t continue to get worse (since I’m definitely not stopping my sports playing). We also spent some time talking about how to work on some long term wellness tracking around high cholesterol and diabetes.

After the visit, I realize that in many ways it wasn’t any different than a regular doctor visit. I could have gone into any doctor’s office and discussed all of these things and likely gotten similar answers. I think part of this is Turntable Health still working on the evolution of how to really treat a patient from a Wellness perspective. However, while many aspects of the treatment were the same, the experience felt different.

The long appointment time. The health coach. The doctor that wasn’t rushed all contributed to a much different visit than you’d get in most doctors’ offices. You can be certain that had I gone to a doctor for my sports issues, we wouldn’t have talked about things like cholesterol and diabetes. There wouldn’t have been time. Was the care any better or worse? It’s the same care that would have been provided by other professionals, but the care was given room to breathe.

As I left the visit, a part of me did feel a little disappointed. You might wonder why after this glowing review of the unique experience. I think the disappointment came from some improperly placed expectations. I’m not sure I really thought deeply about it, but I wish I’d realized that they’re not going to solve your wellness in one visit.

When I think about my psyche as it relates to doctors, I’ve always approached a doctor as someone you go into and they fix you and then you go home. When applying that same psyche to a wellness based approach to medicine, it leads to inappropriate expectations. Wellness is a process that takes time to understand and address. In fact, it’s a process that’s likely never done. So I think that led to my gut reflex expectation of what I’d experience.

I think one way Turntable Health could help to solve these expectations is to do a better job on the first visit to describe the full model and plan for what they want to accomplish with a patient. Otherwise, you really just feel like you’re going in for another doctor’s appointment. I’m not sure if that’s a cool chart of all their services and how they help me improve my wellness or if it’s a list of ways that they’re working to help improve my wellness.

Basically, I wish they’d over communicated with me how Turntable Health was different and how they were going to deploy a suite of professionals and services to better help my overall wellness. It’s easy for those working at Turntable Health to forget that new patients haven’t seen their evolution and don’t know everything they’ve done to improve the primary care experience.

A few other things I’d have loved to seen. First, I filled out their 20 minute (I think it took me 10-15) survey before the appointment. I didn’t get any feeling that the health coach or the doctor had actually seen the results. In fact, the health coach asked me some of the same questions. Redundancy can be appropriate on occasion, but it could have made the visit more efficient if they already knew the answer to those questions and instead of getting the info they could have spent the time talking about the answers as opposed to getting the answers. Plus, I’m sure my answers would have triggered some other discussions. It all made me partially wonder why I filled out the survey in the first place. Were those just part of some research experiment or were they to help me improve my health?

I was quite interested in their portal and what it offered (obviously, since I’m a techguy). It seemed like the framework as opposed to a fully fleshed out solution. I could see where it could grow to something more powerful, but was disappointing on first login. In one area called measurements it had graphs of my Blood Pressure, Fasting Glucose, and Weight. Unfortunately, after one visit they only had one data point and now way for me to easily upload all my weight measurements from my iHealth scale. Hopefully integrations like that are coming since that data could definitely inform my wellness visits. I guess they need to work on the first time user experience for the portal. At least I can schedule appointments through it.

I imagine some of you are probably looking at this as a pretty major investment in my health. Some might even think an hour long appointment would be more time than they want to spend with the doctor. I get that and I don’t always want my appointment to be that long. In fact, now that I have my baseline, I hope that many visits become an email exchange or other electronic method that saves me going into the doctor at all. However, as I’m getting older, I see this as an important investment in my long term health. Hopefully this investment has a good ROI.

With that in mind, I’ll do what I can to keep you updated on my experience. Since I’m on a journey of wellness, I imagine this is Part 2 of Many. I hope you enjoyed the look into my experience.

Giving Email Addresses to Patients Who Don’t Have Them

Posted on August 21, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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?

In 2014, Health IT Priorities are Changing

Posted on January 30, 2014 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Cliff McClintick, chief operating officer of Doc Halo. Cincinnati-based Doc Halo sets the professional standard for health care communication offering secure messaging for physicians, medical practices, hospitals and healthcare organizations. The Doc Halo secure texting solution is designed to streamline HIPAA-compliant physician and medical clinician sharing of critical patient information within a secure environment.

2014 is a major year for health care, and for more reasons than one.

Of course, some of the most significant reforms of the Affordable Care Act take effect this year, affecting the lives of both patients and providers.

But it’s also a year in which health care institutions will come to grips with IT issues they might have been putting off. Now that many organizations have completed the electronic health record implementations that were consuming their attention and resources, they’re ready to tackle other priorities.

Expect to see issues related to communications, security and the flow of patient information play big in coming months. At Doc Halo, we’re already seeing high interest in these areas.

Here are my predictions for the top health IT trends of 2014:

  • Patient portal adoption. Web-based portals let patients access their health data, such as discharge summaries and lab results, and often allow for communication with the care team. Federal requirements around Meaningful Use Stage 2 are behind this trend, but the opportunity to empower patients is the exciting part. The market for portals will likely approach $900 million by 2017, up from $280 million in 2012, research firm Frost & Sullivan has predicted.
  • Secure text messaging. Doctors often tell us that they send patient information to their colleagues by text message. Unfortunately, this type of data transmission is not HIPAA-compliant, and it can bring large fines. Demand for secure texting solutions will be high in 2014 as health care providers seek communication methods that are quick, convenient and HIPAA-compliant. Doc Halo provides encrypted, HIPAA-compliant secure text messaging that works on iPhone, Android and your desktop computer.
  • Telehealth growth. The use of technology to support long-distance care will increasingly help to compensate for physician shortages in rural and remote areas. The world telehealth market, estimated at just more than $14 billion in 2012, is likely to see 18.5 percent annual growth through 2018, according to research and consultancy firm RNCOS. Technological advances, growing prevalence of chronic diseases and the need to control health care costs are the main drivers.
  • A move to the cloud. The need to share large amounts of data quickly across numerous locations will push more organizations to the cloud. Frost & Sullivan listed growth of cloud computing, used as an enabler of enterprise-wide health care informatics, as one of its top predictions for health care in 2014. The trend could result in more efficient operations and lower costs.
  • Data breaches. Health care is the industry most apt to suffer costly and embarrassing data breaches in 2014. The sector is at risk because of its size — and it’s growing even larger with the influx of patients under the Affordable Care Act — and the introduction of new federal data breach and privacy requirements, according to Experian. This is one prediction that we can all hope doesn’t come true.

To succeed in 2014, health care providers and administrators will need to skillfully evaluate changing conditions, spot opportunities and manage risks. Effective health IT frameworks will include secure communication solutions that suit the way physicians and other clinicians interact today.

Doc Halo, a leading secure physician communication application, is a proud sponsor of the Healthcare Scene Blog Network.

What Value Does a Healthy Patient Get from a PHR?

Posted on November 11, 2013 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.

In my previous post about a Patient Controlled Medical Record, I asserted that such a thing would be a challenge to get to work in the US, but that there was a lot of potential internationally. I did provide one caveat when it came to chronic patients where I think there is potential in the US as well. Although, some argued against even that group being interested in the comments.

Let me further expound on why I think the patient controlled medical record fails for a healthy patient (and this includes people who think they’re healthy, or at least relatively healthy…ie. they don’t go to a doctor for any chronic condition). In many respects this is my talking from my own personal perspective as a young, healthy adult (although I guess all of those descriptors could be argued).

The problem for someone that’s healthy is that their medical record basically has no data. The reason you want a patient controlled medical record is so that you can extract value from the data. I don’t need to look at my online medical record to see that I don’t have any drug allergies, that I had a cold or flu 3 years ago, that I got my flu shot 4 years ago, and that when I was 15 I had a hernia operation.

The point being that my medical record is so short that there’s so little value in me trying to aggregate that record in once place. What value do I get from doing so?

I think there could be value in doing so, but not today. For example, if by keeping a patient controlled medical record I could avoid filling out the crazy stack of paperwork that’s given you at every new doctor you visit, I and every other patient would want to keep an online patient record. This should be a solvable problem, but I won’t go into the hundreds of systemic reasons why it’s not going to happen anytime soon. Although, we’ll start with the doctor preferring your allergies to be in the upper right corner in red. Now scale that request up to 700,000 doctors.

Similar to the above item, there are other ancillary functions (ie. appointment scheduling, prescription refills, message your doctor, etc.) that could be tied to your medical record that would make people want to use a PHR or other similar system. However, most people would use it for the ancillary functions and not to be able to control their medical record in one place. For many of the ancillary services this portal will need to be tethered to a PHR.

One trend that I hope will change my description above is the wave of new health sensors that are hitting the market. As those health sensors get better I believe we’ll see a new type of portal that is attractive for even a “healthy” person to visit. This concept coincides with what I call Treating a Healthy Patient. All of this new sensor data could make it worth my time as someone who thinks I’m healthy to check and aggregate my data in one location. The volume of data available would be much more than what I have stored in my memory and so it will make sense for me to visit somewhere that stores and processes my whole medical record.

How these portals full of health sensor data will work with doctors is a topic for another blog post. Until then, I’ll be surprised how many healthy patients really get on board collecting their patient data in a patient controlled medical record.

Does Patient Interaction Lock a Doctor In to an EHR?

Posted on March 28, 2013 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’ve been thinking a lot lately about EHR vendor lock in. I think this was prompted by some stories I’ve heard of EHR vendors holding clinics EHR data “hostage” when the clinic chooses to switch EHR software. I heard one case recently that was going to cost the clinic a few hundred thousand dollars to get their EHR data out of their old EHR software. It’s a travesty and an issue that I want to help work to solve this year (more on that in the future).

I think it’s such a failed model for an EHR vendor to try to keep you as their EHR customer by holding your EHR data hostage. There are so many other ways for an EHR vendor to keep you as a customer that it’s such a huge mistake to use EHR data liquidity to keep customers. EHR vendors that choose to do this will likely pay the price long term since doctors love to talk about their EHR with other doctors. If a doctor is locked into an EHR they dislike, then you can be sure that their physician colleagues won’t be selecting that EHR.

There are a whole series of better ways to lock an EHR customer in long term. The best way being providing an amazing EHR product.

I recently considered another way that I think most EHR vendors aren’t using to create a strong relationship with their physician customers. Think about the strength of a company’s relationship with a doctor if a doctor’s patients are all familiar with their connection to the EHR. If a physician-patient interaction occurs regularly through the EHR, then it’s very unlikely that a doctor is going to switch EHR software.

The most obvious patient interaction that occurs is through a patient portal that’s connected to a provider’s EHR. Once a clinic has gotten a large portion of their patients connected to an EHR patient portal, then it makes it really hard for a doctor to consider switching from that EHR. It’s one thing for a doctor to change their workflow because they dislike their EHR. Add in the cost of getting patients to switch from a portal they have been using and I can see many doctors sticking with an EHR because of their patients.

Of course, from a doctor perspective, there’s some value in selecting an EHR that uses a 3rd party patient portal. That way if you choose to switch EHR software, then you can still consider keeping your interaction with patients the same through the same third party patient portal. Although, there’s some advantage to using the patient portal from the EHR vendor as well. It’s not an easy decision.

Can the Benefits of Hospitals Acquiring Practices Be Achieved By Other Means?

Posted on February 13, 2013 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’ve regularly talked about the current healthcare environment of hospitals acquiring physician practices. This trend is occurring at a really rapid rate, but in an email exchange I had recently with Dave Chase from Avado I started asking myself if the benefits of a consolidated group of providers could be achieved by other means.

At the core of the current trend is a little reimbursement loophole that many hospitals have been exploiting. I wrote about this loophole in a post on Hospital EMR and EHR called Reasons Hospitals Acquire Medical Practices. Considering this reimbursement loophole, I think there is a little that can be done to discourage hospitals that want to try and increase revenue through this loophole.

At some point Medicare is going to catch up with this and close the loophole. Once that happens, it’s worth considering the other benefits of being part of a large organization as opposed to being a solo practice. Plus, can those benefits be achieved through other means than fully acquiring a practice? This is particularly important as doctors that are currently working for hospitals choose to go back out on their own and for those organizations who haven’t already gotten on the practice acquiring bandwagon.

I think the most pressing reason that practices are interested in relationships with hospitals is based on the changing reimbursement models. It will be impossible to access the ACO money that’s coming without tight ties to a large number of organizations. One way to achieve this is for a healthcare organization to acquire all of the various healthcare organizations that will make up an ACO. I think that’s part of what we’re seeing now and I’ve discussed before how this might be the way hospitals avoid the cycle of doctors leaving. Although, we’re already seeing signs of doctors leaving for new medical models.

This seems like a pretty expensive proposition for hospitals to acquire practices just for the doctors to go back to private practice. Which makes me wonder if the benefits of an acquired practice can be achieved through software and relationships? As we’ve discussed before, interfaces in healthcare are quite hard to do. So, once you’ve been able to create that interface with a clinic or hospital, then you have some pretty solid lock in with that organization.

Although, I’m pretty sure that Dave Chase (which inspired this idea) would take this idea one step further. Imagine that most of the patients used one portal to interact with your local healthcare community. Could that portal facilitate your ACO efforts? Once the majority of patients are in that portal, will anyone in the community want to be somewhere else? There’s real lock in that can occur once patients are engaged with healthcare institutions. This occurs with the patients and with the healthcare organizations that are engaging with those patients.

I think it will be interesting to see if software can facilitate some of the same benefits to hospitals that they get from acquiring physician practices.