Quote Of The Year

Timeless Quotes - Sadly The Late Paul Shetler - "Its not Your Health Record it's a Government Record Of Your Health Information"

or

H. L. Mencken - "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Friday, January 20, 2012

It Really Looks Like The US Is On A Bit Of An E-Health Roll. Here Is A Summary Of What Was Done In 2011.

The following review appeared a few days ago

12 Months of Health IT: A Year of Momentous Progress

January 10, 2012 | Farzad Mostashari, MD, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology
ONC earned its nickname as the “Office of No Christmas” during the 2009 Holiday season roughly two years ago when we, along with our colleagues at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), announced the proposed regulations to govern the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Programs (EHR Incentive programs) established under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). CMS’s proposed rule outlined provisions governing the EHR Incentive programs, including defining the central concept of “meaningful use” of EHR technology.
At the same time, ONC issued an interim final regulation that set initial standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for EHR technology. In the closing months of 2009, ONC also issued a flurry of funding opportunities to support health information technology adoption, information exchange, and the workforce needed to make this important Recovery Act program succeed.
A year later, by the 2010 holiday season, vendors, newly accredited certification bodies, and a few vanguard providers were gearing up for the official launch of the EHR Incentive programs, which opened for registration on January 3, 2011. What has happened in the 12 months since then?
I would like to highlight ten of this year’s most notable developments in the world of health information technology and ONC.
1. January: Launch of the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs
Over the past 12 months, the concept of Meaningful Use has thoroughly permeated EHR development and implementation. The marketplace of certified products has grown quickly, interest in Meaningful Use among providers and hospitals is sky-high, and the pace of incentive payments has continued to accelerate.
  • Products: As of today more than 1,500 EHRs—about  1,000 ambulatory and 500 inpatient EHRs— have been certified by one of the six private-sector Authorized Testing and Certification Bodies selected by ONC, up from 300 certified products at the start of the year.  To date, 672 vendors have products certified under the program (60% of those vendors are small businesses with 50 or fewer employees), which is more than a three-fold increase in the number of vendors with certified products at the beginning of the year.  This growth fosters competition, innovation, and gives providers more choices than ever before.
  • Eligible Professionals and Hospitals: As we conclude the year, participation in the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs is strong and growing at an impressive rate. As of November 30, 2011, 154,362 eligible professionals and 2,868 eligible hospitals have registered with either of the EHR Incentive Programs. According to a recent survey, more than two-thirds of hospital CIOs and CEOs identified achieving Meaningful Use as their top IT priority. More than half of office-based physicians say they intend to apply for the Medicare or Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs.
More than 20,000 eligible professionals and 1,200 hospitals have already received their incentive payments from CMS, totaling $1.8 billion so far, with December shaping up to be the biggest month yet.
2. February: Launch of DIRECT
The Direct Project provides a simple, secure, standards-based way for providers and other participants to send encrypted health information directly to trusted recipients over the internet—a kind of “health email.” During 2011, the Direct Project went from publishing its first set of consensus-approved specifications to testing in pilots, to initial production implementation across vendor and state boundaries.
The Direct Project’s 200+ committed members reached consensus on two key specifications enabling secure directed transport of health information. Thirteen pilot communities across the nation put these specifications into practice, and successfully exercised and validated them. Technology and service vendors began offering production Direct capabilities to statewide health information exchanges, state and federal agencies, and health care professionals, with more than 35 vendors having implemented Direct by the end of 2011. Larger communities using Direct in production started to emerge, with Direct as part of the core strategy of 40 state HIE grantees.
3. March: The National Quality Strategy
In March, HHS released the National Quality Strategy for health improvement, the first effort to create a national framework to help guide local, state, and national efforts to improve the quality care in the United States. The National Quality Strategy recognizes health information technology as critical to improving the quality of care, improving health outcomes, and ultimately reducing the costs. Putting the National Quality Strategy into action, HHS subsequently launched two key initiatives that set specific national targets:
  • Partnership for Patients, which is working with a wide variety of private and public stakeholders to make hospital care safer by reducing hospital acquired conditions by 40%, and improving care transitions upon release from the hospital so that readmissions are reduced by 20%.
  • Million Hearts campaign, which is a public-private initiative to prevent 1 million heart attacks and strokes over the next five years by improving access to care and increasing adherence with basic preventive medicine.
The evidence shows that, health information technology, along with delivery system improvements, will be a key ingredient to the success of these campaigns and other efforts around the country to improve health outcomes. A study published this September in the New England Journal of Medicine which looked at diabetes care in Cleveland found:
  • 51% of the patients being treated by physicians practices using an EHR received care that met all endorsed standards of diabetes care compared to 7% of patients treated by non-EHR practices
  • 44% of patients treated by EHR practices met at least four out of five outcome standards for diabetes compared to 16% of patients in paper-based practices with similar outcomes
4. April: Launch of the Standards “Summer Camp”
At the April HIT Standards Committee meeting, Doug Fridsma, Director of the Office of Standards and Interoperability and Acting Chief Science Officer, kicked off the Summer of Standards—an accelerated effort to support the Stage 2 standards and certification requirements for the EHR Incentive Programs.
These activities took place within the Standards and Interoperability Forums. One of the major accomplishments of summer camp was reaching consensus around Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture (CDA): This summer, 150 committed members of the Standards and Interoperability Framework Transitions of Care Initiative—including providers, technology vendors, informaticists, standards institutions, and federal agencies—worked toward consensus on a single standard for transmitting care transitions data. After more than 1,000 balloted issues were resolved, the standard was approved, and subsequently recommended by the HIT Standards Committee for inclusion in the Stage 2 standards and certification requirements for the Medicare and Medicaid Incentive Programs.
For the first time in our country’s history there is a single, broadly-supported electronic data standard for patient care transitions!
Catch up with the other six initiatives here:
The author’s tag line and original link to the blog is here.
 Farzad Mostashari, MD is National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. This post appeared at Health IT Buzz.
Now while I am sure Farzad if guilty of talking his own book just a little it is clear things are really off and rolling. The Direct Project and the Standard for patient care transitions are major steps forward and done in the way I believe things should be done. (Not having unimplemented and un-agreed specifications just issued ex-cathedra as we seem to be seeing right now!)
The full blog is worth a careful read so you can compare and contrast and see how things could be so much different and possibly so much better!
David.

Lots Of Fun Weekend Reading - 33 Submissions Now Posted!

Go here to download and browse:
Enjoy
David.

Tiger Balm Teams - Providing Relief from the Pain of Standards Processes


Tiger Balm Teams, NEHTA's new remedy that works where standards processes hurt. A name that has been trusted by governments to provide specifications for over 6 years.


With their unique formulation specially selected from NEHTA architects and industry experts which are proven safe and compliant, Tiger Balm Teams' standardisation processes and soothing relief from meetings and more meetings restore balance to modern standards processes, and give a sense of wellness to NEHTA and DOHA.

Suitable for young and old standards, the authority we’re familiar with has also diversified into a range of PCEHR-specific solutions like B2B Gateways, Repository Interfaces and Basic Vendor Repository that address varying needs of the different methods of access.

With apologies to www.tigerbalm.com

-----

A little Friday comment! Love the e-Health logo on the tin! Thanks to the anonymous author!


David.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

HCN Joins The NEHTA Supporting Club. Too Little To Late Or A Smart Move?

This release appeared a little while ago. The release is dated 19 Jan, 2012.

Medical Director Launches eHealth Initiatives

Health Communication Network (HCN), the market leading clinical software vendor, has today announced the release of 3 key components relating to Australia’s eHealth strategy.  Health Identifiers (IHI, HPI-I, and HPI-O) have been introduced in Medical Director and PracSoft, and Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) handling for discharge summaries and specialist letters (reports) have also been released to market with Medical Director.  This is a strong indicator of HCN’s commitment to the National eHealth strategy with regard to improving clinical outcomes at the point of care.
This release enables over 5,700 medical practices nationally to start using Health Identifiers and is a big win for the National eHealth Transition Authority (NEHTA) and DoHA in driving the National eHealth Strategy to fruition. John Frost, HCN CEO, comments:  “HCN is committed to the government’s eHealth strategy and will ensure that those aspects of eHealth that are important to our customers and their patients are delivered.  Over coming years the increased use of IHIs will, we expect, have a profoundly positive effect on reducing the incidence of misidentification which today is a major cause of medical misadventure.  I’m proud that HCN, through our market leading products, can assist clinicians in more reliably matching discharge summaries and specialist letters with the correct patient file through the automatic use of IHIs.  Further, as the acute sector increasingly adopts the use of CDA Discharge Summaries our GP and specialist doctor customers will finally receive one of the most frequently requested benefits of eHealth.” 
These new features will improve the communication of important clinical information between doctors without disruption to the clinical workflow and will not be a burden for practice managers.  “We understand the challenges placed on modern general practitioners and specialists and strive to ensure that the eHealth initiatives delivered via Medical Director and other HCN products add value to the clinicians and practices overall without impost on an already time poor profession; patient care is not compromised by labour intensive or time consuming tasks associated with eHealth initiatives.” says John Frost.
About CDA:
Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) is an XML-based mark-up standard for specifying the encoding, structure and semantics of clinical documents for exchange.  Medical Director now accepts CDA-based Discharge Summaries and Specialist letters (reports).
About Health Identifiers
The Federal, state and territory governments have developed a national Healthcare Identifiers Service (HI Service) which will uniquely identify healthcare providers and individuals who seek healthcare. The HI Service will give individuals and healthcare providers confidence that the right health information is associated with the right individual at the point of care. 
The HI Service aims to improve the security and efficient management of an individual’s personal health information with strict privacy laws governing how these numbers are used.  Health Identifiers are a very important factor that could drive significant improvements in patient safety.
I leave it to the reader to assess what this release actually means.
I would note that Medical Director does not seem to be able to SEND anything based on CDA (referrals etc.) and that somehow CDA based referrals, lab reports and so on seem not to be mentioned as being received either.
Please let me know what you think all this means - when HCN Products don’t seem to be sending any CDA documents to the PCEHR. Just how does that fit with the present National Strategy? Or have I misread?
This comment is really odd.
"This release enables over 5,700 medical practices nationally to start using Health Identifiers and is a big win for the National eHealth Transition Authority (NEHTA) and DoHA in driving the National eHealth Strategy to fruition."
Is this an admission of a response to NEHTA / DoHA pressure or just rather odd phrasing? 
I would note the release does not mention the PCEHR. Maybe all this is to follow?

David.

Now Here Is An Interesting Survey Of Clinician Attitudes To Technology. Australian Doctors Included!

The following popped up very late last year. It is of special interest as one of the countries covered was good old OZ!

Eight-country survey shows worldwide agreement on Health IT benefits, but a generational divide does exist.

Overview

While the majority of doctors are convinced that “Connected Health” brings benefits, a surprising amount of doctors are skeptical of the associated healthcare IT benefits. Research among more than 3,700 doctors in eight countries reveals ripe opportunities to accelerate a broad national Connected Health initiative, according to a new survey from Accenture. The survey illuminates prevailing perceptions (based on demographics and geography) among doctors today over the future of Connected Health. While the survey illustrates similarities and differences in perceptions of healthcare IT, the findings clearly show that the broadest, fastest path to integrated, effective health practices requires outreach, education and changing mindsets among some doctors, especially those over 50 who are not actively using healthcare IT.
Many doctors, however, remain unconvinced that healthcare technologies, such as electronic medical records (EMR) and health information exchanges (HIE), will improve patient outcomes, improve access to services or reduce unneeded procedures. Interestingly, these are the benefits most often touted for widespread adoption of EMR and HIE and, therefore, this disconnect creates barriers to fully realizing the benefits of a truly Connected Health ecosystem.
December 22, 2011

Background

Connected Health is an approach to healthcare delivery that leverages the systematic application of healthcare IT to facilitate the accessing and sharing of information, as well as subsequent analysis of health data across healthcare systems. It is using knowledge and technology in new ways for more effective, efficient and affordable healthcare. The future of healthcare entails systems and infrastructures that enable information management, analysis and sharing—it is the engine of what Accenture calls Insight Driven Health.
High-level benefits of Connected Health include:
  • Better access to quality data for clinical research
  • Improved coordination of care across care settings and service boundaries
  • Improved health outcomes for patients
Accenture conducted this survey in Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Singapore, Spain and the United States from August to September 2011. Accenture surveyed approximately 500 doctors per country (200 in Singapore) on their attitudes towards and perceived benefits of healthcare IT. This survey is one part of a comprehensive Connected Health study that will be published in early 2012. The study incorporates results from this doctor survey as well as input from interviews with more than 150 industry experts, and 10 case studies of successful Connected Health implementations.

Analysis

It was surprising that a high percentage of doctors either did not know of or did not associate a positive impact on the use of EMR and HIE with some of the main selling points of a Connected Health system. Among the key findings:
·         Almost half of doctors surveyed, 44 percent, are not convinced that healthcare IT will help reduce the number of unnecessary interventions and procedures.
·         Forty-three percent of doctors are not convinced that healthcare IT systems will result in increased speed of access to health services.
·         Almost 40 percent are not convinced that the use of healthcare IT will bring improved outcomes for patients.
The Accenture survey found that doctors under 50 are more likely to believe that healthcare IT has a positive impact across a wide range of perceived benefits, including improved health outcomes for patients, increased speed of access to health services and reductions in medical errors. More than 72 percent of doctors under 50 think EMR and HIE will improve care coordination across settings and service boundaries. And, 73 percent believe these technologies will offer better access to quality data for clinical research. These numbers vary, however, for doctors over 50—only 65 percent and 68 percent respectively perceive the same benefits.

Recommendations

Despite all eight countries being at a relatively early stage of the Connected Health journey, there is evidence that doctors truly desire change. These findings clearly signal ways that governments and healthcare organizations can speed progress toward Connected Health. There is work ahead to fully convince physicians that healthcare IT will ensure better patient care, lower healthcare costs and make them more effective and efficient.
Building organizational development and change management capabilities are crucial steps for success to help convince the majority of doctors of the value of healthcare IT, and thus drive its progress. Strategic change management is among the six dynamics that must be fully executed for a country to realize the full benefits of Connected Health. The soon-to-be-released study will explore all six of these dynamics in detail.
Clinician involvement—especially among doctors—is also a central theme of those organizations and systems that are succeeding in the development of Connected Health. This is more than simple communication. It requires doctors’ active involvement in planning change and guiding its implementation with their peers and colleagues.
Change must be manageable. Where top-down, whole-system re-engineering has been attempted at a national level, there have been as many failures as successes. When policymakers and health leaders have identified achievable targets and tangible, medium-term outcomes, rapid progress is possible.
Lots more here:
A .pdf with graphics of the findings and country comparisons is found here:
Looking at the Australian results it is clear that - at least in Aug/Sep last year there was not a strong conviction among doctors that Connected Health was going to make a huge difference.
It is interesting to see what was considered important in Australia and that - as usual - the important things were not obviously provided by the PCEHR.
It is also interesting to see the more use was made of systems to more valuable they were seen to be.
The .pdf is well worth a browse as are the lessons seen in the summary above!
David.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

And To Follow On From The Post Earlier Today It Seems Some Web Enabled Patient Empowerment Just Doesn’t Work!

The following appeared today our time.

Study: Web-based tools not effective for diabetes management

January 17, 2012 — 12:59pm ET | By Sara Jackson
The idea of using online tools to manage patients' diabetes is a good one, but few of the tools available today actually live up to that potential, according to researchers at the University of Toronto.
That's the upshot of a recent study published in the January issue of the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. Researchers reviewed 92 web-based tools, and 57 studies about them, and found that most weren't simple enough, had problems with usability, and didn't provide enough interactivity or feedback. They also experienced "high attrition rates," or patients simply not using them. 
.....
To learn more:
- read the JAMIA study
- check out CMIO's coverage 
More of the article here:
So much for all the fluff from NEHTA and DoHA that web enabled collaborative care works (it certainly seems evidence is lacking with the most obvious candidate - Diabetic Management).
All this goes back to the fundamental issue. There is just no evidence to justify the PCEHR that anyone has so far produced - and to be convincing it would need to be long term and properly validated work - and I am not expecting that any anytime soon.
If NEHTA and DoHA had a clue about evidence based policy we would not have this nonsense wasting everyone’s time and effort, and the expenditure could be much better directed.
Sorry, these guys are some of those who when asked ‘when the facts change what do you do?’ would say “we just press on”!
Pretty sad!
David.

Some More Evidence And Commentary Regarding PHRs - Some Varying Views For You To Consider and A Very Interesting Site to Visit!

First we have this:

Why Personal Health Records Have Flopped

It's not a security, privacy, or data-sharing problem. It's a patient problem.
By Paul Cerrato,  InformationWeek
January 13, 2012
What's holding people back from signing up for a personal health record? According to Colin Evans, former CEO of the PHR provider Dossia, it's the unwillingness of healthcare providers to give them control over their medical data.
I couldn't disagree more.
The main reason the public doesn't sign up for PHRs en mass is they don't really care that much about their health. Yes, concerns about security and privacy and the reluctance of providers to share patient information slow things down, but at its core this is about apathy.
Just look at the statistics. Despite the push by medical and technology industry stakeholders over the years, only about 10% of Americans now use an electronic PHR. And let's not forget the recent demise of Google Health, the search giant's attempt to get the public interested in PHRs.
As I've said before, most Americans care more about their cars than their health. They know more about automotive specs than they do about physiological specs. Similarly, most people want to see a doctor only when something breaks down, and then they expect a pill or procedure to make things right, just as they expect their car mechanic to fix their cars. Healthcare for most Americans is about having someone else "make it better," not about personal responsibility.
More here
and second a rather more hopeful tone is struck here.

Is 2012 The Year Of Online Patients?

Meaningful Use programs, healthcare reform, and the public's love of mobile devices could add up to patients finally getting fully involved in their own care.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee,  InformationWeek
January 12, 2012
Sticking with New Year's resolutions is still top of mind for many folks. No doubt many are looking to the new smartphones, iPads, and health-related apps that Santa delivered to help fulfill those resolutions. So could 2012 be the year of tech-enabled patient engagement?
A New Year's resolution may only be the tip of the iceberg. Meaningful use and accountable care organizations will encourage patient engagement, according to Patti Brennan, a professor of nursing and engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and national program director of Project HealthDesign.
The program, launched several years ago and funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, explores ways to improve personal health records by capturing and integrating patient recorded data.
"With MU and ACOs, it begins to really matter what happens to patients when they're not there" in the clinical setting, said Brennan in an interview with InformationWeek Healthcare.
First, the HITECH Act's $27 billion-plus Meaningful Use program has more clinicians rolling out systems that digitize patient data. Also, Stage 2 and Stage 3 are expected to require more electronic interaction between patients and clinicians, she said.
Meanwhile, more clinicians are planning to participate in accountable care organizations, whose payment models aim to reward healthcare providers for more coordinated care and improved patient outcomes.
In order for these organizations to work, doctors will have to convince patients to get more involved in their own healthcare--including using their own data to keep better tabs on their illnesses. In fact, payments tied to better patient outcomes--helped by smarter use of patient data-- is a big driver for more healthcare providers to participate in patient engagement initiatives, Brennan said.
Yet, with so much on doctors' plates as it is—"most doctors don't want a tsunami of new data" added to EHR and other systems from their patients' home health monitoring or wellness devices, said Brennan. That's especially true since most of this data doesn't warrant emergency care.
However, when there is an issue that requires immediate attention, Project HealthDesign teams have found that patients' monitoring data can be successfully sent to or shared with other clinicians, such as triage nurses or case managers, who can often help facilitate earlier intervention, or give feedback to patients without overwhelming doctors.
Patients who do have chronic conditions "want to have an easy way of monitoring themselves without overdoing it," because when they are tracking too many things or too frequently, "they end up giving up the monitoring within a few weeks or months," said Brennan.
Lots more here:
This site is a very interesting goldmine of ideas that might contribute to a ‘reboot’ of the idea of the PHR. Of course if NEHTA and DoHA are following this work they are - as usual - keeping it secret!
Just why doesn’t NEHTA have a news resource to keep the public and interested professionals across just what is happening overseas in e-Health. (Surely they can’t be happy to leave it to others?) Could it be they are just so insular they actually don’t know what is going on or is it that they don’t see they have a role in information provision and education beyond glittery PR brochures that are as content free as possible.
Whatever the reason - here is the link:
Well worth a browse to see how others are thinking about making the PHR useful, what groups would most benefit and so on.
Someone should ask when we will have a mobile device enabled PCEHR!
David.

A Reader Request To Complete A Survey on the AMT Provided by NEHTA.

I had an email a little while ago asking could I ask those who are interested to respond to the NEHTA Survey on the Australian Medicines Terminology.
Here is the link to the page:
There are only a few days left to go so if you want to maybe suggest some changes - get weaving!
David.