Friday, January 23, 2015

The USA Seems To Be Having Some Difficulties Moving Ahead With Meaningful Use. Not Good News!

This appeared a little while ago.

Little To Show For $26 Billion Health IT Investment

The electronic sharing of information (health information exchange) plays a critical role in improving the cost, quality, and patient experience of healthcare. However, there is very little electronic information sharing among clinicians, hospitals, and other providers despite more than $24 billion in incentive payments to hospitals and eligible professionals who "meaningfully use" electronic health records, and another $2 billion spent on interoperability standards and EHR certification over the past five years.
This according to a health policy brief written by Janet Marchibroda, director of the Health Innovation Initiative at the Bipartisan Policy Center published by Health Affairs and supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Marchibroda explains, “While considerable investments in health IT have been made, advancement of interoperability and electronic information sharing across systems has been slow,” and “Additional action is needed to provide the information foundation necessary for higher-quality, more cost-effective, patient-centered care in the United States.”
Because most payment in the U.S. healthcare system today is volume based versus outcomes or value based, “there is little financial incentive to share information across settings to reduce costs or improve the quality of care.” Although new care models are expected to expand the business case for interoperability and information sharing, Marchibroda reports “so far these new models of care have relied upon old models of information sharing, including the use of phone, fax, or mail, or siloed information-sharing networks.”
The major obstacles to electronic sharing of information include the lack of a business case, the financial cost associated with exchange, a lack of standards adoption and interoperability of systems, continued concerns about privacy and security, and concerns about liability.
A study published by Health Affairs found that, of physicians surveyed in 2013, only 14 percent electronically sharing data with providers outside of their organizations.
Lots more here:
My mates who know the US scene pretty well are now suggesting that the US is now finding progress to be a good deal harder than previously with some technical interoperation issues causing problems and only few users being able to meet the required standard of functionality and access to receive continuing incentive payments.
It might be that this is again a case of a little too much, too soon.
Sound familiar?


Trevor3130 said...

Interoperability? Maybe that's what Turnbull's Digital Transformation Office is going to address. I've made two polite inquiries at that site (DTO), one about IHIs as unique digital identifiers, one about Financial System Inquiry recommendation for federated digital identity scheme. (I expect the Turnbull Team to take a while to post that comment.)

Anonymous said...

Using the IHI's for other purposes will require changes to the Healthcare Identifier Act. Be interesting to see if they go that path or create another identifier for broader purposes. (with new legislation)

Anonymous said...

It would be good to see the HI service being sucessfully used for its intended purpose first. What ever happened to the MSIA report in 2012 and the formation of a governance group, schoomer or later someone sufficating in the bunker needs to fix NASH HI and the PCEHR and stop dreaming up new things to do to distract themselves from the real problems.