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!!

2 Major Problems with MACRA

Posted on May 4, 2016 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.

Everyone’s started to dive into the 10 million page MACRA (that might be an exaggeration, but it feels about that long) and over the next months we’ll be sure to talk about the details a lot more. However, I know that many healthcare organizations are tired of going through incredibly lengthy regulations before they’re final. Makes sense that people don’t want to go through all the details just for them to change.

As I look at MACRA from a very high level, I see at least two major problems with how MACRA will impact healthcare.

Loss of EHR Innovation
First, much like meaningful use and EHR certification, MACRA is going to suck the life out of EHR development teams. For 2-3 years, EHR roadmaps have been nothing but basically conforming to meaningful use and EHR certification. Throw in ICD-10 development for good measure and EHR development teams have basically had to be coding their application to a government standard instead of customer requests and unique innovations.

Just today I heard the Founder of SOAPware, Randall Oates, MD, say “I’m grieving MACRA to a great degree.” He’s grieving because he knows that for many months his company won’t be able to focus on innovation, but will instead focus on meeting government requirements. In fact, he said as much when he said, “We don’t have the liberty to be innovative and creative.” And no, meeting government regulations in an innovative way doesn’t meet that desire.

I remember going to lunch with a very small EHR vendor a year or so ago. I first met him pre-meaningful use and he loved being able to develop a unique EHR platform that made a doctor more efficient. He kept his customer base small so that he could focus on the needs of a small group of doctors. Fast forward to our lunch a year or so ago. He’d chosen to become a certified EHR and make it so his customers could attest to meaningful use. Meaningful use made it so he hated his EHR development process and he had lost all the fire he’d had to really create something beautiful for doctors.

The MACRA requirements will continue to suck the innovation out of EHR vendors.

New Layers of Work With No Relief
When you look at MACRA, we have all of these new regulations and requirements, but don’t see any real relief from the old models. It’s great to speak hypothetically about the move to value based reimbursement, but we’re only dipping our toe in those waters and so we can’t replace all of the old reimbursement requirements. In some ways it makes sense why CMS would take a cautious approach to entering the value based world. However, MACRA does very little to reduce the burden on the backs of physicians and healthcare organizations. In fact, in many ways it adds to their reporting burden.

Yes, there was some relief offered when it comes to meaningful use moving from the all or nothing approach and a small reduction in the number of measures. However, when it comes to value based reimbursement, MACRA seems to just be adding more reporting burdens on doctors without removing any of the old fashioned fee for service requirements.

MACRA is not like ICD-10. Once ICD-10 was implemented you could see how ICD-9 and the skills required for that coding set will eventually be fully replaced and you won’t need that skill or capability anymore. The same doesn’t seem to be true with value based care. There’s no sign that value based care will be a full replacement of anything. Instead, it just adds another layer of complexity, regulation, and reporting to an already highly regulated healthcare economic system.

This is why it’s no surprise that many are saying that MACRA will be the end of small practices. At scale, they’re onerous. Without scale, these regulations can be the death of a practice. It’s not like you can stop doing something else and learn the new MACRA regulations. No, MACRA is mostly additive without removing a healthcare organization’s previous burdens. Watch for more practices to leave Medicare. Although, even that may not be a long term solution since most commercial payers seem to follow Medicare’s lead.

While I think that CMS and the people that work there have their hearts in the right place, these two problems have me really afraid for what’s to come in health IT. EHR vendors the past few months were finally feeling some freedom to listen to their customers and develop something new and unique. I was excited to see how EHR vendors would make their software more efficient and provide better care. MACRA will likely hijack those efforts.

On the other side of the fence, doctors are getting more and more burnt out. These new MACRA regulations just add one more burden to their backs without removing any of the ones that bothered them before. Both of these problems don’t paint a pretty picture for the future of healthcare.

The great part is that MACRA is currently just a proposed rule. CMS has the opportunity to fix these problems. However, it will require them to take a big picture look at the regulation as opposed to just looking at the impact of an individual piece. If they’re willing to focus MACRA on the big wins and cut out the parts with questionable or limited benefits, then we could get somewhere. I’m just not sure if Andy Slavitt and company are ready to say “Scalpel!” and start cutting.

What’s the Source of Provider Discontent?

Posted on May 14, 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 the comments of my post, “Do Doctors Care About the Triple Aim?”, Dr. Randall Oates, Founder of SOAPware offers his perspective on the provider discontent we see growing:

What you say is true and largely explains the growing discontent of physicians. Multiple surveys reveal that at least 40% of physicians are not just unhappy, but manifest symptoms of burn-out. Most of them have become complicit with systems where everyone is more focused on how to get paid more. The few healthcare delivery systems achieving on the Triple Aim and who have better physician satisfaction have almost all been blessed with physician leaders who step up to the challenge of collaboratively creating the necessary cultures focused on delivering value to patients. Value = Quality/Cost. This focus is necessary in order to produce not only the highest satisfaction but the greater financial rewards going forward. Again, doctors not operating at the top of their license and who have become distracted data drones are complicit with an increasingly corrupt system. The vast majority of physicians view that being able to be part of a quality process is more satisfying than the income received. So, those that are the happiest, and thriving the most are ones who are on a pleasing path to the Triple Aim.

Sadly, the trends of the government-medical-industrial complex are increasingly filled with the hubris that value can be forced from the top-down via controlling algorithms into which patients and their doctors become data points to be plugged in and controlled.

The degree of success we will see with any true healthcare reform will be the degree to which patients become more engaged and accountable. Those will need relationships with physicians deserving of their trust within healthcare delivery systems focused more on the value equation. Success simply has to come from the bottom-up, so this will force many true physicians to have to leave the more toxic delivery systems in some locales. They will be forced to either move or more directly interact with patients minus the misguided, controlling interference in their communities.

Dr. Oates is highlighting the comment I made in the post. Not all incentives are financial and we need to find a way for healthcare to more than just a financial reward.

As most of you know I do a fair amount of work with tech companies in my home town of Las Vegas. The most famous Las Vegas tech company (casinos aside) is Zappos. If you haven’t heard, Zappos has created a unique culture. Next time you’re in Las Vegas, let me know and we can go on a tour of Zappos together and you’ll see what I mean. Everything from allowing people in their office to decorate their desk (and they are unique I tell you) to the competitions and events they run. Their blog subhead says it all, “Experience fun with a Little Weirdness.”

Why do I bring this up? It turns out that beyond Zappos tech component, the majority of Zappos employees are call center employees. I heard one person describe Zappos as a big customer service call center. That’s not far off. If you’ve never worked in a call center before, it’s not what most would consider a “fun” job. However, the Zappos culture has created a place where people love working for a company that is paying them a low wage to answer the phone. Let me assure you that their employees are fiercely loyal.

I’m not suggesting that healthcare should adapt the model of fun and a little weirdness. What I am saying is that Zappos created a workplace where the job was about much more than just your paycheck. Healthcare needs to embrace a similar notion where doctors enjoy their job for much more than just the paycheck.

Is Your EMR a Spoon or a Backhoe? – Importance of How an EMR Vendor Implements Meaningful Use

Posted on December 8, 2010 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.

It has become more and more apparent that the way an EMR vendor implements the meaningful use requirements is going to be critically important to a doctor’s successful adoption of the meaningful use criteria which is of course essential to get the $44,000 in EMR stimulus money.

I think it’s easy for doctors and practice managers that aren’t as familiar with the various EMR software and with the details of the EMR stimulus to get confused. On face, it seems that the effort to get the EMR stimulus money shouldn’t be affected by which EMR software you choose as long as it is an ONC-ATCB certified EMR. However, this is just categorically WRONG!

The EHR certification is meant to tell you that it CAN meet the meaningful use guidelines. It doesn’t tell you how easily it is to meet the meaningful use guidelines. It doesn’t tell you how well they integrated the meaningful use guidelines into your regular workflow. It doesn’t tell you how well it lets you delegate the meaningful use tasks to other staff members so you can optimize the doctors time. So, yes, EHR certification should mean it’s possible to show meaningful use. EHR certification does not make any claims to how effective that EHR software will actually accomplish the task.

Here’s a simple analogy:
If I wanted to dig a hole for a footing on a house, I could probably use a spoon to dig the hole. It would take forever to actually dig the hole, but a spoon could work. It would suck to use a spoon to dig the hole and quite honestly I’d probably give up before I finished, but with enough blood sweat and tears I could get the hole dug.

Of course, if I had a shovel, digging the hole would be much easier. I could get it done with just a bit of hard work. It would obviously go a lot faster than a spoon. Now, if I had a backhoe, digging the hole would basically be academic. Achieving the goal would be simple to accomplish, because the tool was designed perfectly to achieve it.

It’s worth asking yourself whether the EMR you use or the EMR you choose is a golden spoon or a powerful backhoe when it comes to achieving meaningful use. Maybe both can achieve the goal of meaningful use, but is it just made to look nice and shiny or was it really designed to make achieving meaningful use as painless as possible?

Thanks to Randall Oates from SOAPware and Evan Steele from SRSsoft for inspiring this post.

I was talking with Randall recently about SOAPware’s approach to EHR certification and meaningful use. He told me that SOAPware could have thrown something together quickly and been easily certified against the EHR certification criteria when it first opened. However, he didn’t like that approach. Instead he wanted SOAPware to take its time and make sure that the criteria were implemented in a usable and useful way.

Evan just posted a blog post about not all meaningful use EMR being equal. Here’s one portion of what he said that prompted this post:

Demonstrating meaningful use will still demand additional work, and certified—or to-be-certified—EMRs are not alike in how they facilitate doing this. It is critical for physicians to understand and evaluate the differences among EMRs in terms of how they deliver meaningful use capability and the impact on the time it takes to meet the requirements with each.

Evan also offers a few suggestions on things you might ask your EMR vendor:
*How easy is it to enter the required data? (This is particularly important as requirements become more demanding in future stages of the program.)
*What changes will you have to make to the way you see patients?
*How will you document the care you provide?
*Does the system effectively allow delegation of tasks to staff members to minimize the time physicians must spend doing data entry?
*Does the vendor’s software platform enable keeping up with evolving requirements?

There you go! Now you have a list of questions you can ask SRSsoft (and other EMR vendors) when you’re evaluating them.

I’d love to hear other ways people are evaluating an EMR vendor’s implementation of meaningful use. Not to mention ways that EMR vendor’s have implemented meaningful use that differentiates themselves from other EMR vendors.

EMR Quality Metrics

Posted on July 12, 2010 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’m completely fascinated by stats and metrics. I’m not sure what it is, but it’s like a drug for me. Looking at charts of what’s happening on my blog is like a little shot of adrenaline. Turns out that this isn’t just true for me. It’s true for many bloggers.

So, of course I was interested when I got an email talking about SOAPware EMR’s quality metrics. Ok, so I was a little misled by the title. At first, I thought I was going to see some really interesting metrics on how SOAPware EMR had improved the quality of patient care that was provided. I expected some really interesting initiatives and collaborations with doctors around improving patient care. Instead, it was a post about the quality of support that SOAPware offers their clients.

While not quite what I was hoping to see, it’s still really interesting to have a high level view of the type of support an EMR vendor offers. Finding an EMR company that provides top notch support is an essential part of selecting an EMR and I commend SOAPware for making what appears to be a sincere effort to measure and improve the support they offer.

Of course, they stopped short of publishing what would be the most interesting part of the survey results. Yes, I’m talking about the narrative answers to the question: “Any additional comments” That would likely be a pretty interesting read. They do address them generally when they say, “The negatives that we currently see in the comments are most often about appointments with support that were late, or return calls that had delayed response times. These are part of our growing pains, and we are taking actions to address these issues.”

I love seeing EMR companies taking a pro active role in providing great support for their EMR. Trust me. You don’t want to be using an EMR where you can’t get support from your EMR vendor.

Interview with President of SOAPware EMR – Randall Oates

Posted on October 21, 2009 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.

After my previous interviews with EMR vendor CEO’s, a couple people requested that I do an interview with Randall Oates, President of SOAPware EMR. Thanks to their help I was able to connect with Randall and the following is my email interview with Randall Oates.

Give us a short history of SOAPware. Why were you orginally an EMR only (no practice management system – PMS)?
I divide SOAPware’s history into 4 stages:
1. 1987 to 1992 – Prototype stage – I created the prototype for SOAPware using a program called Hypercard on early Apple Macintosh computers while building a very large and active medical practice in Springdale, Arkansas. I was already using a computerized billing systems, and had no interest in developing one.

2. 1992 to 1994 – Start-up – Greg Lose, a real programmer, came in to turn the prototype into a commercial product. He continues to lead the way doing research and development.

3. 1994 to 2005 – Market dominance in small practices – David Powell came on as CEO. In 2005, there was not an EMR product installed in more sites than SOAPware.

4. 2005 to present – Focus on transition to next generation, comprehensive EMR – We retreated from major marketing, and engaged a complete rewrite of the software. We are now focusing almost all resources on completing the product suite and simplifying what is presently an often an overly-complex interface.

In 2004, only 12% of new EMR customers were shopping for a combined EMR/PMS. Now, it is over 70%. This emphasizes our need to have the fully integrated product as soon as is possible. A need for integrated billing system as well as transitioning to a much more robust product has accentuated our temporary retreat. In spite of this, we have continued to experience growth in every quarter (compared to the same in the previous year). However, our dominance has briefly waned a bit.

Greg, David, and I remain as the principals in the company. One year ago, a fairly accurate summary was published at MDNG – The EHR Trailblazers. Until 2005, it was our intent to keep a focus on the EMR and links in order to interface with PMS systems. However, in 2008, it became apparent that an overwhelming majority of EMR users want a fully integrated, rather than interfaced, EMR-PMS. So, we launched into development of our fully integrated PMS that is now in an alpha-testing phase. It uses the same database as the EMR, is written in the same computer language, and does not require a separate installer. BTW, if anyone knows any good C#, .net programmers that want to join a great team, we are hiring. However, the next few need to be willing to relocate to either Fayetteville, AR. or Denver, CO.
Why do you think the industry shifted to integrated EMR and PMS?
The EMR market has passed out of the early adopter phase, and is presently in the chasm that leads up to the phase of mass adoption. Early adopters were not as intimidated by interfaces between vendors as are the masses. Even though the overall cost and hassles are often less with an interfaced EMR-PMS than with many of the currently available “fully integrated” systems, the perception by the masses is otherwise.

Even though we will soon release our fully integrated system, we will continue to work with interfaced solutions.
Do you still think that it’s reasonable to have a separate EMR and PMS?
Short term, and as long as we continue to have little of the billing information actually entered at the point of care by clinicians, interfaced systems will have utility. However, by 2013, when ICD-10 coding is required, and certainly by 2015 when SNOMED-CT coding is required for diagnoses, it will no longer be practical for physicians to delegate the task of selecting billing codes. Billing claims will be moving from including 14.000 ICD-9 CM diagnosis codes to including over 120,000 ICD-10 codes. It will not be practical for billing clerks, alone, to be able to get to the required level of specificity. The paper superbills physicians tend to use, today, will have to expand from one page to at least ten pages. This, along with the need for clinicians to perform accurate reporting of “performance measures” at the point of care, will likely render interfaced systems (with billing clerks expected to enter the data) as too cumbersome and limited to be practical.

The irony with this question is that a majority of so-called “integrated” systems are really separate EMR and PMS systems that just happen to be sold by a single vendor. With very few exceptions, the EMR and the PMS have been created by separate teams and then have been later interfaced, or glued together, in some fashion. It is not unusual for them to be written in completely different computer languages. They often even use different databases, and even require separate installers. Going forward, these can only be cumbersome, at best.
Tell us about your methods for training people who purchase SOAPware.
We have focused on minimizing the necessity for formal classes and thus minimized the direct and indirect costs for training. Few small practices can afford the luxury of closing the practice to attend a bunch of classes. Our focus is to take a more asynchronous approach. We advocate for most of the staff in medical practices begin with a 2-3 hours introduction going through a series of free, interactive videos which are then, ideally, followed by 30-60 minute question-answer sessions delivered remotely. In order for this to be most successful, this general staff training has been preceded by a thorough practice readiness assessment and “pilot” implementation projects where much of the site-specific customization have been created in advance. We have a collection of Implementation Milestones documents to follow. General staff training is fairly late and of lesser importance than other the other implementation challenges. We are in the process of moving the Milestone documents to a SharePoint wiki in order for our implementation facilitators to be able to more efficiently monitor the implementation process and collaborate at whatever level the practice needs.

Lastly, and most expensively, one-on-one SOAPware training can be arranged both remotely and on-site in the same fashion that most other vendors offer.

We also have The Path in our online wiki called SOAPedia. It is a step-by-step implementation guide that some practices (those with good leadership and change management skills) can utilize to train/implement on a fairly independent and very inexpensive basis.
Are you seeing or do you anticipate having the EMR backlog (ie. long wait times for training and implementation support) that so many people are talking about?
We already have waiting times for our training services, and this is likely to worsen in the short term. Long term, we are engaging several initiatives in order to be able to quickly scale up for the demand. Not only are we hiring more training staff, but we are creating a new “partner” program that is fairly unique. For example, our current users will be encouraged to become certified SOAPware trainers in their own communities. (Intuit has done this with great success with QuickBooks, and disrupted an entire industry as a result.)

Ideally, after the initial 2-3 hours of interactive video training, new users will go into practices using SOAPware, live, and actually see/use the system. By doing this, a new user can take a morning to get the video introduction, spend the afternoon working with the system in action, and then be good to go live the second day.
Will SOAPware be participating in the ARRA EMR stimulus money program?
Yes, we expect a majority of our users to participate in the ARRA bonus program rewarding practices that demonstrate meaningful use of a certified EMR.
I see that you’re CCHIT 2007 certified. What’s SOAPware’s plans in regards to future certifications? Will you be going for HHS certification, CCHIT 2011 Certification or Preliminary ARRA Certified?
We will definitely be going for HHS certification so that our users can qualify for the ARRA bonus payments. Whether or not we will also go for CCHIT certification in the future remains to be determined. Presently, CCHIT is the only entity on the immediate horizon to certify for HHS, but other certifying entities are likely in the works. It is just too early to announce who we will utilize for future, HHS certification.
Tell us about 3 specific features which make SOAPware special.
1. SOAPware fully supports the use of either free-text narratives or fully structured data in almost all areas of the medical record via what we call SMARText. In contrast, most EMR’s are predominantly one or the other:
Paper Behind Glass – Most low cost, simple EMR’s are more of this type in that they simply display the familiar free-text narratives that physicians now prefer. Over 90% of systems that are actually being used at the point of care are of this type. If a physician likes the EMR, it is probably of this type. Sadly, the problem with using an EMR in this fashion is that little computer-readable information is present that can be exchanged with other systems. This will force clinicians using these systems to have to upgrade to versions with kludges allowing them to navigate to secondary screens with add-on workflows in order to click-in all the needed, structured data items. This will lower physician productivity because every time the physician hikes in to see a patient, they will have to sit down and spend a lot of time “picking off all the ticks.” So, the easy to use and more popular, “paper behind glass” EMR’s will soon be just as cumbersome and inefficient as the current generation of comprehensive offerings. However, an advantage, today, of this type is that it can be implemented with less effort, training, etc. After all, it is mostly about just moving the paper behind glass. While efficiencies can be gained in the process, the tendency is to mostly persist with often inefficient workflows.

Comprehensive Systems – are typically more expensive and require dozens to hundreds of clicks by the clinician for each patient encounter. Physicians, by a large majority, detest these systems. Surveys also confirm far less than 10% of physician EMR users (even those having access to comprehensive systems) are actually using their system in comprehensive fashions. The physicians actually using the current generation of comprehensive systems in a comprehensive fashion have usually seen significant and long term losses in productivity, or they are in low volume situations from the beginning. These systems typically handle the often necessary and important narrative, free-text in awkward fashions. Having to start EMR use in a comprehensive fashion causes training and initial customizations to be generally very complex, expensive and disruptive to overall practice efficiencies. It is sort of like forcing doctors to jump to the 10th ladder rung rather than starting on the first rung. The high failure rates with these systems is presently the key reason the EMR industry is receiving such low marks and experiencing low adoption rates.

Typically, what these systems do best is deliver great sales presentations and influence to many of the decision makers serving larger practices. Too often, the decision makers tend to be individuals who will rarely actually use the EMR while seeing patients.

SOAPware can either be used either as paper behind glass or as a comprehensive system collecting real data. More importantly, our design facilitates a gradual migration from the simple free-text narrative to as much structured data as is necessary, and in fashions that are less likely to lower physician productivity along the way.

Other than SOAPware, I only know of 2 other mainstream EMR’s, eMDs and Medtuity, that practically allow for the actual items in the medical record documentation to be linked to the multiple coding systems (i.e. can encapsulate SNOMED-CT, LOINC, RxNorm, codes etc.) that meaningful use is going to require. Some other systems might come close, but are so inflexible that typical practices can’t afford the custom programming required to change the actual items physicians use to create encounter documentation. What is truly unique with the current generation of the SOAPware EMR is that most updates of these data items can also be performed online and automatically at any time without having to purchase new versions.

2. The basic layout of the chart can be instantly individualized/switched to be most efficient for different roles (i.e. doctor vs. nurse), patient types (e.g. pediatric or diabetic), and amount of monitor space available.

3. External documents of almost any type (text, video, audio, spreadsheets, pdf, etc.) can be dragged-and-dropped just about anywhere in the SOAPware electronic chart. This is a very unique aspect that provides the equivalent of a first level (i.e. manual) interface to just about any other system.
Describe SOAPware’s integration with Dragon NaturallySpeaking. How many of your clients use DNS?
Somewhere between 10 and 30% of SOAPware users use DNS. I strongly advocate its use for those “snippets” of narrative, free-text information that are unique to each patient. For example, if a mother is stressed out because grandma-in-law is visiting again, this will never fit very well in a templated or structured entry, but may be the most relevant data item for a patient presenting with a headache. I do not advocate simply replacing dictation with DNS, as that will not meet the need to have structured, reportable information in the record. Again, dictation, alone, can only create paper behind glass, and can only leave the practice in the dark ages.

The other down side to DNS is that it does not yet function ideally in either ASP or cloud-based solutions. While the past ASP approach to delivering technology solutions to practices has not seen great success, the emerging cloud-based solutions will likely trigger the EMR revolution. For example, our hosted, cloud-based solution, allows for the practice to have their own, virtual server in the Internet cloud. This removes the expense and hassles of attempting to maintain a clinic server, network, back-ups, etc, but the practices are not just limited to only the software and solutions that the typical, more limited ASP approach can offer. I just hope the engineers can figure out how to make speech recognition more fully compatible with these hosted, virtual, or cloud-based solutions before the end of 2010.
What do you think is missing in the EMR world now?
1. What is mainly missing is an accurate perception of reality. That is… recognition that it is nothing less than insanity to expect physicians to become data entry clerks! In the future, we are going to look at the current approaches to EMR implementation in the same fashion as we now view the practice of leeching and blood-letting of the past. Data entry should rarely be performed by clinicians! Instead, it should be done via other avenues such as the patient, medical assistants, and data gleaned from information that already exists, but is siloed into some other information system. The EMR technology, as well as changes in the practice workflows, should be used to liberate physicians from most data entry, and not increase that burden. Watch for some exciting announcements in 2010 as to how that can be most effective accomplished in a practical fashion using SOAPware.
2. A proper understanding of the necessary process changes practice need to make before even considering the available EMR solutions is generally missing. Along with this is a dearth of approaches advocating tolerable, incremental evolutions. To better understand the later, see- Ten Steps to a Patient-Centered Medical Home . Instead, vendors and “decision makers” tend to advocate destructive, big bang styles of implementations, because they perceive the technologies and process changes available to them don’t really support incremental change.
3. We are missing standards allowing for the sharing of information that is patient-centric rather than industry-centric. The former tend to be easier and more practical for patients and small medical practices. The later tend to be what the current, moneyed-controlling entities in healthcare prefer.
4. EMR’s need standards in order to be more open-platform in order to support best-of-breed solutions. No single vendor can deliver a monolithic application that is ideal for almost any specific practice.
You’re a pretty avid blogger. Do you write all the posts or is it just your name and picture? Why do you blog?
Nobody else writes any of my blog posts, but I often quote/reference others. My blog is more therapy for me than anything else. It is my tool to speak out as well as communicate what I think physicians need to know regarding challenges before them.

At times, I offer periodic updates that are more specific for SOAPware users. We have a very large community of SOAPware version 4 users (i.e. paper behind glass method) that now need to begin the process of migrating to more comprehensive use of information. This needs to be properly managed via clinician leadership and practice readiness assessments in order to be most efficient. These practices need to upgrade within the next few months, because the second half of 2010 needs to be free to add in the registry (i.e. population reporting) and patient portal (i.e. electronic communications) that are to follow the release of our integrated billing system. Again, these, more comprehensive functions, need to be added only after careful planning and practice preparation.
Are there other blogs or websites that you visit regularly for EMR information?
Too many to mention, but my favorites are:
The Healthcare Blog
Chilmark Research
Histalk and HisPractice
Life as a Healthcare CIO
Change Doctor

Thanks to Randall Oates for taking the time to answer these questions. Some really informative information. Let me know if there are other people you’d like interviewed and I’ll see what I can do.