Last Monday, CMS launched a new website intended to help health care providers better understand the criteria to meet federal requirements for the “meaningful use” of electronic health record systems, Government Health IT reports.

Under the 2009 federal economic stimulus package, health care providers who demonstrate meaningful use of EHRs will qualify for Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments (Mosquera, Government Health IT, 6/21).

Website visitors can download fact sheets detailing the proposed program requirements and the proposed definition of meaningful use.

The site also clarifies various terms, such as “eligible professional” and “certification,” that are included in the HITECH Act (McKinney, Modern Healthcare, 6/21).

In addition, the site includes:

• An overview of the incentive program;
• Information about what health care providers are eligible for incentive payments;
• Information on how to register for the program; and
• Guidance on what health care providers can do to prepare for meaningful use.

CMS also said that it would use the website to publicize EHR training and events related to the incentive program (Government Health IT, 6/21).

According to Modern Healthcare, the website will offer more specific information about the incentive eligibility requirements after CMS issues the final rule on the EHR incentive programs later this summer (Modern Healthcare, 6/21).

Source: http://www.ihealthbeat.org/articles/2010/6/22/cms-unveils-new-website-on-meaningful-use-incentives.aspx

The Electronic Healthcare Network Accreditation Commission has recommended a series of changes to the federal government’s proposed rule on electronic health record certification, Healthcare IT News reports.

EHNAC, a not-for-profit standards group, issued the recommendations in response to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on EHR certification.

ONC’s proposed rule calls for the establishment of a temporary EHR certification program, which eventually would be replaced by a permanent certification program. The temporary program would allow ONC-authorized certification bodies to test and certify EHRs and EHR modules.

Recommendations

EHNAC officials said the group is concerned that the current definition of ONC-authorized certification bodies would exclude EHNAC and other organizations from consideration as certifiers of health information exchanges.

The group said its recommendations would enable EHNAC to be named a health data exchange certifier without needing official designation as an EHR certifier.

In its recommendations, EHNAC called for ONC to:

• Allow certifiers to establish a “virtual” office for conducting certification tasks;
• Extend the deadline for organizations to develop certification programs to encourage more groups to apply for designation as temporary certifiers;
• Eliminate unscheduled site visits and provide organizations with sufficient time to prepare for planned visits; and
• Refrain from considering a certified testing program a necessary requirement for the certification of health IT products (Monegain, Healthcare IT News, 5/25).

Above article publish on http://www.ihealthbeat.org/articles/2010/5/25/standards-organization-calls-for-onc-to-revisit-ehr-certification-rule.aspx

By Mike Miliard

CLEVELAND – Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) School of Medicine has received nearly $8 million in federal stimulus money from the Ohio Health Information Partnership (OHIP), the state designated entity for health information exchange development. That funding will position the school as a regional extension center (REC), allowing it to help 1,765 healthcare providers in Lorain, Cuyahoga, Lake, Geauga and Ashtabula counties advance the use of health IT in their practices.

The CWRU School of Medicine is one of seven RECs in Ohio established by OHIP and made possible by funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). An eighth REC was awarded directly by the federal government to HealthBridge, a not-for-profit health information exchange serving Greater Cincinnati and surrounding areas.

The federal and state initiative is providing smaller primary care practices with an incentive to early adoption of health information technology.

“Electronic health records tend to be financially out of reach for private practitioners and small practices,” said Julie Rehm, senior associate dean of the CWRU School of Medicine and associate vice president of strategic initiatives for CWRU. “If healthcare providers adopt early they are eligible for additional reimbursement from the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services until 2011. After that, the reimbursement declines and penalties kick in starting in 2015.”

The REC endeavor, as directed by the federal government, is targeted towards primary care providers, specifically, physicians—MDs or DOs who are family physicians, general internal, pediatric or OB/GYN, and other primary care providers such as nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, or physician assistants with prescriptive privileges and practicing in one of the previously mentioned areas.

The CWRU School of Medicine will provide administration and management to multiple contractors whose roles will vary by expertise but overall will help providers select products and provide training on how to use the technology to its fullest potential in order to improve patient care. This includes providing workforce support, implementation and project management, practice and workflow design, vendor selection, privacy and security best practices, progress towards meaningful use, functional interoperability and health information exchange.

The CWRU REC has a number of stakeholders, including University Hospitals, the Cleveland Clinic and Massachusetts eHealth Collaborative. In addition, the entities likely to participate in the CWRU REC include Kaiser Permanente, Medical Mutual of Ohio and CareSource.

“The School of Medicine is committed to improving the health of our community,” said Pamela B. Davis, MD, dean of the School of Medicine and vice president for medical affairs, CWRU. “We believe that HIT is a key tool in healthcare reform and we look forward to partnering with independent healthcare providers to encourage quick adoption of HIT. Once enabled, HIT provides a two-fold benefit: 1) improving patient care, for example, through electronic alerts that notify healthcare providers of a patient’s need for annual testing e.g., mammograms, and 2) by lowering healthcare costs by reducing redundant testing.”

The Case Western Reserve REC is expected to begin work sometime this month.

“Success for the CWRU REC will be measured in three ways,” said Rehm. “First, we must meet the milestones and metrics that are being asked of us by the federal government. Second, we must enable the earliest adoption possible which will allow primary care providers to pull in the maximum amount of federal dollars from reimbursements. And third, we must improve the quality of care through the utilization of this technology which will ultimately improve the health of Clevelanders.”

Above article publish on http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/case-western-reserve-help-providers-adopt-ehrs-ohio

By Andrea Kraynak

Hospitals with electronic health records (EHR) may be eligible for meaningful use incentives as early as October 2010, and physicians follow soon after. What if a provider is hoping to take advantage of the incentives, but is still fully paper-based? Waiting for the release of final rules on the incentive program and EHR certification before moving forward may not be wise.

Providers should begin by looking into the reasons their facility doesn’t have many of the components that make up an EHR, or lacks an electronic system altogether. For example, if providers haven’t begun to invest in a system because of high up-front costs, they may be able to obtain funding that can help.

“Right now, there is a significant amount of money that is being funneled through the states for health IT,” says Chris Apgar, CISSP, president of Apgar & Associates, LLC, in Portland, OR. Depending on their location, healthcare providers may be able to take advantage of it.

“Go to the medical association in your state that you’re a member of, and put a little pressure on them,” he says.

If your state has grant or loan funding available, remind your association that there is money available and encourage them to lobby and partner with others to push your state to start allocating EHR funding, whether it happens to be low- or no-interest loans or outright grants.

If your state is not offering funding, there may be other programs you can find that offer no- and low-cost loans and other programs to provide support and consultative assistance, especially for small hospitals and physicians, says Margret Amatayakul, RHIA, CHPS, CPHIT, CPEHR, FHIMSS, president of Margret\A Consulting in Schaumburg, IL.

Smaller providers may also want to look into independent physicians associations (IPA), some of which are purchasing EHRs and making them available through a subscription fee. With this option, you have your own Web-based version, and you pay the IPA a certain amount annually to host the EHR, explains Apgar.

“This can be affordable because you don’t have to go out and buy a brand-new system and implement it and have someone administer it and all that,” he says. “You’re paying a subscription fee to use it, in essence, so you don’t have the cost of ownership.”

Remember, however, that subscription-based EHRs may end up costing more in the end, even though they are becoming more common, Apgar says.

If you are still searching for an EHR vendor, don’t forget about the big picture. With additional requirements coming soon, whether additional meaningful use measures or other capabilities your EHR will need to be ICD-10 compliant, look for a product and vendor that will be able to keep up.

“If you are in the position of buying a product today, you want to be buying a product that is going to take you through those stages,” Amatayakul says. “My sense is that you approach this by trying to address the long haul. Otherwise, you’re going to be faced with pieces of things that don’t work together real well.”

And avoid vendors who don’t have a sense of the upcoming changes and how they plan to address them.

“If there is little to no understanding on the part of the vendor as to what this means, or the vendor can’t describe for you what they plan to do, I would avoid that vendor,” Amatayakul says. “That means they’re not going to be able to keep up.”

Above Article Publish on http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/page-1/TEC-247509/Get-Moving-to-Catch-Early-EHR-Meaningful-Use-Incentives

Vendors and users of electronic health record modules should monitor them closely for potential data security breaches, according to the Health IT Standards Committee, Government Health IT reports.

The suggestion was included in a summary of the committee’s recommendations on the interim final rule on standards and certification criteria for health IT under the 2009 federal economic stimulus package. The rule describes the requirements for certified EHR systems that physicians and hospitals must use to qualify for health IT adoption incentives.

John Halamka — vice chair of the committee, who published a summary of the recommendations in a March 9 blog post — said the committee “recommended that a list of acceptable technology standards be included in the certification process” in part because IT security standards change quickly, particularly for those strengthening encryption.

According to Halamka, the committee also recommended that the interim final rule “specify broad families of standards” for clinical operations, such as a major version of each standard that also includes a “detailed implementation guide that serves as a floor.”

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT has offered the interim final rule for public comment until Monday (Mosquera, Government Health IT, 3/11).

Above article publish on http://www.ihealthbeat.org/articles/2010/3/12/standards-panel-calls-for-increased-monitoring-of-security-in-ehr-modules.aspx

Healthcare IT News in this article published the list of 25 meaningful use objectives that professionals and hospitals must meet in order to receive stimulus funds from the government provided through Recovery Act. This list was taken from the proposed rule: “Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Electronic Health Record Incentive Program.

[1] Objective: Use CPOE

Measure: CPOE is used for at least 80 percent of all orders

[2] Objective: Implement drug-drug, drug-allergy, drug- formulary checks

Measure: The EP has enabled this functionality

[3] Objective: Maintain an up-to-date problem list of current and active diagnoses based on ICD-9-CM or SNOMED CT®

Measure: At least 80 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP have at least one entry or an indication of none recorded as structured data.

[4] Objective: Generate and transmit permissible prescriptions electronically (eRx).

Measure: At least 75 percent of all permissible prescriptions written by the EP are transmitted electronically using certified EHR technology.

[5] Objective: Maintain active medication list.

Measure: At least 80 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP have at least one entry (or an indication of “none” if the patient is not currently prescribed any medication) recorded as structured data.

[6] Objective: Maintain active medication allergy list.

Measure: At least 80 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP have at least one entry (or an indication of “none” if the patient has no medication allergies) recorded as structured data.

[7] Objective: Record demographics.

Measure: At least 80 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP or admitted to the eligible hospital have demographics recorded as structured data

[8] Objective: Record and chart changes in vital signs.

Measure: For at least 80 percent of all unique patients age 2 and over seen by the EP, record blood pressure and BMI; additionally, plot growth chart for children age 2 to 20.

[9] Objective: Record smoking status for patients 13 years old or older

Measure: At least 80 percent of all unique patients 13 years old or older seen by the EP “smoking status” recorded

[10] Objective: Incorporate clinical lab-test results into EHR as structured data.

Measure: At least 50 percent of all clinical lab tests results ordered by the EP or by an authorized provider of the eligible hospital during the EHR reporting period whose results are in either in a positive/negative or numerical format are incorporated in certified EHR technology as structured data.

[11] Objective: Generate lists of patients by specific conditions to use for quality improvement, reduction of disparities, research, and outreach.

Measure: Generate at least one report listing patients of the EP with a specific condition.

[12] Objective: Report ambulatory quality measures to CMS or the States.

Measure: For 2011, an EP would provide the aggregate numerator and denominator through attestation as discussed in section II.A.3 of this proposed rule. For 2012, an EP would electronically submit the measures are discussed in section II.A.3. of this proposed rule.

[13] Objective: Send reminders to patients per patient preference for preventive/ follow-up care

Measure: Reminder sent to at least 50 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP that are 50 and over

[14] Objective: Implement five clinical decision support rules relevant to specialty or high clinical priority, including for diagnostic test ordering, along with the ability to track compliance with those rules

Measure: Implement five clinical decision support rules relevant to the clinical quality metrics the EP is responsible for as described further in section II.A.3.

[15] Objective: Check insurance eligibility electronically from public and private payers

Measure: Insurance eligibility checked electronically for at least 80 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP

[16] Objective: Submit claims electronically to public and private payers.

Measure: At least 80 percent of all claims filed electronically by the EP.

[17] Objective: Provide patients with an electronic copy of their health information (including diagnostic test results, problem list, medication lists, and allergies) upon request

Measure: At least 80 percent of all patients who request an electronic copy of their health information are provided it within 48 hours.

[18] Objective: Provide patients with timely electronic access to their health information (including lab results, problem list, medication lists, allergies)

Measure: At least 10 percent of all unique patients seen by the EP are provided timely electronic access to their health information

[19] Objective: Provide clinical summaries to patients for each office visit.

Measure: Clinical summaries provided to patients for at least 80 percent of all office visits.

[20] Objective: Capability to exchange key clinical information (for example, problem list, medication list, allergies, and diagnostic test results), among providers of care and patient authorized entities electronically.

Measure: Performed at least one test of certified EHR technology’s capacity to electronically exchange key clinical information.

[21] Objective: Perform medication reconciliation at relevant encounters and each transition of care.

Measure: Perform medication reconciliation for at least 80 percent of relevant encounters and transitions of care.

[22] Objective: Provide summary care record for each transition of care and referral.

Measure: Provide summary of care record for at least 80 percent of transitions of care and referrals.

[23] Objective: Capability to submit electronic data to immunization registries and actual submission where required and accepted.

Measure: Performed at least one test of certified EHR technology’s capacity to submit electronic data to immunization registries.

[24] Objective: Capability to provide electronic syndromic surveillance data to public health agencies and actual transmission according to applicable law and practice.

Measure: Performed at least one test of certified EHR technology’s capacity to provide electronic syndromic surveillance data to public health agencies (unless none of the public health agencies to which an EP or eligible hospital submits such information have the capacity to receive the information electronically).

[25] Objective: Protect electronic health information maintained using certified EHR technology through the implementation of appropriate technical capabilities.

Measure: Conduct or review a security risk analysis in accordance with the requirements under 45 CFR 164.308 (a)(1) and implement security updates as necessary.

Above article publish on http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/eligible-provider-meaningful-use-criteria

The state of Kentucky will receive a $2.6 million in federal matching funds from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to help fund the development of the state’s electronic health records incentive program.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided a 90 percent federal match for state planning activities related to the creation of an incentive program that encourages Medicaid providers to establish electronic medical records systems, according to a CMS news release.

Electronic medical records give health care providers instant access to patients’ medical information over a secure network. When complete, the Kentucky system is expected to help health care providers coordinate patient care.

Kentucky will use the funding to analyze the progress state’s health information technology initiative, according to the release.

Officials will explore topics such as barriers to developing the records system, provider eligibility for participating in the electronic health records network and the creation of a state Medicaid health information technology plan, according to the release.

Above article publish on http://health-information.advanceweb.com/Web-Extras/EHR-Today/KY-to-Receive-Federal-Funds-for-EHR.aspx

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act establishes an incentive program that provides incentive payments to eligible physicians (EP) and eligible hospitals for meaningfully using electronic health records (EHR). While many specialists are learning the conditions under which they can capitalize on these incentive payments, anesthesiologists will learn that they do not qualify as EPs, thus not able to receive incentive payments for their meaningful use of EHRs.

One requirement that a physician satisfy is that s/he is a non-hospital-based physician. “Hospital-based” physicians are defined to include those that provide 90% of their Medicare-covered services within a Place of Service (POS) of 21, 22, or 23–either an inpatient hospital, outpatient hospital, or emergency room hospital, respectively. Furthermore, the statute explicitly states that anesthesiologists–who furnish substantially all of their Medicare-covered services in a hospital setting, using the hospital’s facilities and equipment, and qualified EHRs–are not eligible to receive the incentive payments because they are not bringing their own equipment to the hospital in furtherance of the medical services they perform. If a hospital demonstrates is meaningful use of an EHR, it can qualify for incentive payments.

Above article publish on http://www.attorney-dwi.info/health/incentive-payments-for-meaningful-use-of-ehr-technology-does-not-apply-to-anesthesiologists/

On December 30, 2009, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) at the Department of Health and Human Services issued proposed regulations on the definition of “meaningful use” and the initial set of standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for EHR technology.

This announcement was made in conjunction with the publishing of two separate documents and a request for public comments:

Health Information Technology Initial Set of Standards, Implementation

Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Electronic Health Record Incentive Program

Beginning on page 32 of the “Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Electronic Health Record Incentive Program” document, a definition of “meaningful use” is provided along with associated discussions such as definition background and definition considerations.

Both documents discuss the proposed stages of “meaningful use”:

Stage 1 (beginning in 2011): The proposed Stage 1 meaningful use criteria “focuses on electronically capturing health information in a coded format; using that information to track key clinical conditions and communicating that information for care coordination purposes (whether that information is structured or unstructured, but in structured format whenever feasible); consistent with other provisions of Medicare and Medicaid law, implementing clinical decision support tools to facilitate disease and medication management; and reporting clinical quality measures and public health information.”

Stage 2 (beginning in 2013): CMS has proposed that its goals for the Stage 2 meaningful use criteria, “consistent with other provisions of Medicare and Medicaid law, expand upon the Stage 1 criteria to encourage the use of health IT for continuous quality improvement at the point of care and the exchange of information in the most structured format possible, such as the electronic transmission of orders entered using computerized provider order entry (CPOE) and the electronic transmission of diagnostic test results (such as blood tests, microbiology, urinalysis, pathology tests, radiology, cardiac imaging, nuclear medicine tests, pulmonary function tests and other such data needed to diagnose and treat disease). Additionally we may consider applying the criteria more broadly to both the inpatient and outpatient hospital settings.”

Stage 3 (beginning in 2015): CMS has proposed that its goals for the Stage 3 meaningful use criteria are, “consistent with other provisions of Medicare and Medicaid law, to focus on promoting improvements in quality, safety and efficiency, focusing on decision support for national high priority conditions, patient access to self management tools, access to comprehensive patient data and improving population health.”

Pages 51 through 61 of the “Health Information Technology Initial Set of Standards, Implementation” document provide Stage 1 “meaningful use” objectives in a table alongside corresponding certification criteria to support the achievement of “meaningful use” Stage 1 by eligible professionals and eligible hospitals. In reading this table, keep in mind the provided definition of “EHR module”:

EHR Module: any service, component, or combination thereof that can meet the requirements of at least one certification criterion adopted by the Secretary

The following note is provided alongside examples of EHR modules:

While the use of EHR Modules may enable an eligible professional or eligible hospital to create a combination of products and services that, taken together, meets the definition of Certified EHR Technology, this approach carries with it a responsibility on the part of the eligible professional or eligible hospital to perform additional diligence to ensure that the certified EHR Modules selected are capable of working together to support the achievement of meaningful use. In other words, two certified EHR Modules may provide the additional capabilities necessary to meet the definition of Certified EHR Technology, but may not integrate well with each other or with the other EHR technology they were added to. As a result, eligible professionals and eligible hospitals that elect to adopt and implement certified EHR Modules should take care to ensure that the certified EHR Modules they select are interoperable and can properly perform in their expected operational environment.

Pages 79 through 81of the “Health Information Technology Initial Set of Standards, Implementation” document elaborate on this interoperability requirement for patient summary records, drug formulary checks, electronic prescribing, administrative transactions, quality reporting, submission of lab results to public health agencies, submission to public health agencies for surveillance or reporting, and submission to immunization registries. Page 85 outlines adopted privacy and security standards for Certified EHR Technology, and the document distinguishes these standards from those associated with HIPAA.

With a combined total of nearly-700 pages, the two documents discussed here necessitate a thorough review that will take some time to digest. This post simply provides an initial level of awareness that these documents have been published.

Above article publish on http://nvisia.com/techs/?p=364

Dom Nicastro and Janice Simmons, for HealthLeaders Media,

With the release yesterday of its “meaningful use” definition and standards, government agencies have laid the foundation for an “evolutionary process in achieving and maintaining the meaningful use of certified EHR technology,” says Frank Ruelas, director of compliance and risk management at Maryvale Hospital and principal, HIPAA Boot Camp, in Casa Grande, AZ.

CMS and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Improvement Technology (ONC) on Wednesday, December 30, released two anxiously-awaited regulations providing both the definition of “meaningful use” of electronic health records (EHRs) and the standards to improve the efficiency of health information technology used nationwide by hospitals and physicians.

“Both regulations are important in their own right, but they should be seen as part of a larger effort—a more comprehensive effort—to improve the health of the American people and the efficiency of its health system by equipping physicians, hospitals, and other health professionals with the best, most accurate, and most up-to-date information that they need and can use to help their patients, ” said David Blumenthal, MD, national coordinator for health information technology, at a briefing late Wednesday.

Ruelas cites the identification of three stages, each with its own set of objectives that support the meaningful use of an EHR. Providers can be eligible for thousands of dollars if they meet the criteria included in the three stages.

The initial set of criteria will focus on collecting data electronically, sharing this data with other healthcare providers and patients, and finally reporting the measures to the government. The second stage of criteria would be proposed by the end of 2011. This will focus on structured information exchange and continuous quality improvement. Stage 3, which will focus on decision support for “national high priority conditions” and population health, would come out in 2013.

For example, physicians must use computerized provider order entries (CPOEs) for 80% of their orders; hospitals 10%, according to CMS’ proposed rule.

“This was a very novel approach, in my opinion, because as is stressed in this document, the adoption of certified EHR technology and its meaningful use is more of a process to be developed and adopted over time versus an on/off proposition,” Ruelas says. “Oftentimes, people will use the phrase that some processes are more like running a marathon than a sprint. This interim rule certainly gives the impression that we going to be in a marathon mode.”

The ONC interim final rule begins to define standard formats for clinical summaries and prescriptions; standard terms to describe clinical problems, procedures, laboratory tests, medications and allergies; and standards for the secure transportation of this information using the Internet.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 required HHS to adopt an initial set of standards for EHR technology by December 31, 2009. This regulation will go into effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, with an opportunity for public comment over the next 60 days. A final rule will be issued in 2010.

above article publish on : http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/content/TEC-244313/Marathon-of-Meaningful-Use-EHR-Standards-Just-Beginning