News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

Damo Consulting Survey Predicts Future Health Network Spending Will Primarily be on Improving EHRs; Could be Positive Development for Medical Laboratories

Survey shows healthcare providers plan to wait for AI and digital health technologies to mature before making major investments in them

Clinical laboratories must develop strategies for connecting to their client doctors’ electronic health record (EHR) systems. Thus, a new survey that predicts most healthcare networks will continue to focus health information technology (HIT) spending on improving their EHRs—rather than investing in artificial intelligence (AI) and digital healthcare—provides valuable insights for medical laboratory managers and stakeholders tasked with implementing and maintaining interfaces to these systems.

According to Damo Consulting’s 2019 Healthcare IT Demand Survey, when it comes to spending money on information technology (IT), healthcare executives believe AI and digital healthcare technologies—though promising—need more development.

Damo’s report notes that 71% of healthcare providers surveyed expect their IT budgets to grow by 20% in 2019. However, much of that growth will be allocated to improving EHR functionality, Healthcare Purchasing News reported in its analysis of Damo survey data.

As healthcare executives plan upgrades to their EHRs, hospital-based medical laboratories will need to take steps to ensure interoperability, while avoiding disruption to lab workflow during transition.

The survey also noted that some providers that are considering investing in AI and digital health technology are struggling to understand the market, the news release states.

“Digital and AI are emerging as critical areas for technology spend among healthcare enterprises in 2019. However, healthcare executives are realistic about their technology needs versus their need to improve care delivery. They find the currently available digital health solutions in the market are not very mature,” explained Paddy Padmanabhan (above), Chief Executive Officer of Damo Consulting, in a news release. (Photo copyright: The Authors Guild.)

Providers More Positive Than Vendors on IT Spend

Damo Consulting is a Chicago-area based healthcare and digital advisory firm. In November 2018, Damo surveyed 64 healthcare executives (40 technology and service leaders, and 24 healthcare enterprise executives).  Interestingly, healthcare providers were more positive than the technology developers on IT spending plans, reported HITInfrastructure.com, which detailed the following survey findings:

  • 79% of healthcare executives anticipate high growth in IT spending in 2019, but only 60% of tech company representatives believe that is so.
  • 75% of healthcare executives and 80% of vendor representatives say change in healthcare IT makes buying decisions harder.
  • 71% of healthcare executives and 55% of vendors say federal government policies help IT spending.
  • 50% of healthcare executives associate immaturity with digital solution offerings.
  • 42% of healthcare providers say they lack resources to launch digital.  

“While information technology vendors are aggressively marketing ‘digital’ and ‘AI,’ healthcare executives note that the currently available solutions in these areas are not very mature. These executives are confused by the buzz around ‘AI’ and ‘digital,’ the changing landscape of who is playing what role, and the blurred lines of capabilities and competition,” noted Padmanabhan in the survey report.

The survey also notes that “Health systems are firmly committed to their EHR vendors. Despite the many shortcomings, EHR systems appear to be the primary choice for digital initiatives among health systems at this stage.”

Some Healthcare Providers Starting to Use AI

Even as EHRs receive the lion’s share of healthcare IT spends, some providers are devoting significant resources to AI-related projects and processes.

For example, clinical pathologists may be intrigued by work being conducted at Cleveland Clinic’s Center for Clinical Artificial Intelligence (CCAI), launched in March. The CCAI is using AI and machine learning in pathology, genetics, and cancer research, with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes, reported Becker’s Hospital Review.

“We’re not in it because AI is cool, but because we believe it can advance medical research and collaboration between medicine and industry—with a focus on the patient,” Aziz Nazha, MD, Clinical Hematology and Oncology Specialist and Director of the CCAI, stated in an article posted by the American Medical Association (AMA).

AI Predictions Lower Readmissions and Improve Outcomes

Cleveland Clinic’s CCAI reportedly has gathered data from 1.6 million patients, which it uses to predict length-of-stays and reduce inappropriate readmissions. “But a prediction itself is insufficient,” Nazha told the AMA. “If we can intervene, we can change the prognosis and make things better.”

The CCAI’s ultimate goal is to use predictive models to “develop a new generation of physician-data scientists and medical researchers.” Toward that end, Nazha notes how his team used AI to develop genomic biomarkers that identify whether a certain chemotherapy drug—azacitidine (aka, azacytidine and marketed as Vidaza)—will work for specific patients. This is a key goal of precision medicine

CCAI also created an AI prediction model that outperforms existing prognosis scoring systems for patients with Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), a form of cancer in bone marrow.

Partners HealthCare (founded by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital) recently announced formation of the Center for Clinical Data Science to make AI and machine learning a standard tool for researchers and clinicians, according to a news release.

Meanwhile, at Johns Hopkins Hospital, AI applications track availability of beds and more. The Judy Reitz Capacity Command Center, built in collaboration with GE Healthcare Partners, is a 5,200 square feet center outfitted with AI apps and staff to transfer patients and help smooth coordination of services, according to a news release.

Forbes described the Reitz command center as a “cognitive hospital” and reports that it has essentially enabled Johns Hopkins to expand its capacity by 16 beds without undergoing bricks-and-mortar-style construction.

In short, medical laboratory leaders may want to interact with IT colleagues to ensure uninterrupted workflows as EHR functionality evolves. Furthermore, AI developments suggest opportunities for clinical laboratories to leverage patient data and assist in improving the diagnostic accuracy of providers in ways that improve patient care.

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

2019 Healthcare IT Demand Survey

Digital and AI are Top Priorities in 2019 as EHR Investments Continue to Dominate

Healthcare IT Spending Priorities Include Big Data Analytics, AI

Healthcare IT Demand Survey: Digital and AI are Top Priorities in 2019 as EHR Systems Continue to Dominate IT Spend

Cleveland Clinic Launches Clinical AI Center: 4 Things to Know

Cleveland Clinic Ready to Push AI Concepts to Clinical Practice

Cleveland Clinic Creating Center for AI in Healthcare

Partners HealthCare Embraces Democratization of AI to Accelerate Innovation in Medicine

Johns Hopkins Hospital Launches Capacity Command Center to Enhance Hospital Operations

The Hospital Will See You Now

Sorting through EHR Interoperability: A Modern Day Tower of Babel That Corrects Problems for Clinical Laboratories, Other Providers

Despite the widespread adoption of electronic health record (EHR) systems and billions in government incentives, lack of interoperability still blocks potential benefits of digital health records, causing frustration among physicians, medical labs, and patients

Clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups understand the complexity of today’s electronic health record (EHR) systems. The ability to easily and securely transmit pathology test results and other diagnostic information among multiple providers was the entire point of shifting the nation’s healthcare industry from paper-based to digital health records. However, despite recent advances, true interoperability between disparate health networks remains elusive.

One major reason for the current situation is that multi-hospital health systems and health networks still use EHR systems from different vendors. This fact is well-known to the nation’s medical laboratories because they must spend money and resources to maintain electronic lab test ordering and resulting interfaces with all of these different EHRs.

Healthcare IT News highlighted the scale of this problem in recent coverage. Citing data from the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS) Logic database, they note that—when taking into account affiliated providers—the typical health network engages with as many as 18 different electronic medical record (EMR) vendors. Similarly, hospitals may be engaging with as many as 16 different EMR vendors.

The graphics above illustrates why interoperability is the most important hurdle facing healthcare today. Although the shift to digital is well underway, medical laboratories, physicians, and patients still struggle to communicate data between providers and access it in a universal or centralized manner. (Images copyright: Healthcare IT News.)

The lack of interoperability forces healthcare and diagnostics facilities to develop workarounds for locating, transmitting, receiving, and analyzing data. This simply compounds the problem.

According to a 2018 Physician’s Foundation survey, nearly 40% of respondents identified EHR design and interoperability as the primary source of physician dissatisfaction. It has also been found to be the cause of physician burnout, as Dark Daily reported last year in, “EHR Systems Continue to Cause Burnout, Physician Dissatisfaction, and Decreased Face-to-Face Patient Care.”

Pressure from Technology Giants Fuels Push for Interoperability

According to HITECH Answers, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has paid out more than $38-billion in EHR Incentive Program payments since April 2018.

Experts, however, point out that government incentives are only one part of the pressure vendors are seeing to improve interoperability.

“There needs to be a regulatory push here to play referee and determine what standards will be necessary,” Blain Newton, Executive Vice President, HIMSS Analytics, told Healthcare IT News. “But the [EHR] vendors are going to have to do it because of consumer demand, as things like Apple Health Records gain traction.”

Dark Daily covered Apple’s progress into organizing protected health information (PHI) and personal health records (PHRs) earlier this year in, “Apple’s Update of Its Mobile Health App Consolidates Data from Multiple EHRs and Makes It Easier to Push Clinical Laboratory Data to Patients.” It is one of the latest examples of Silicon Valley tech companies attempting to jump into the health sector and providing patients and consumers access to the troves of medical data created in their lifetime.

Another solution, according to TechTarget, involves developing application programming interfaces (APIs) that allow tech companies and EHR vendors to achieve better interoperability by linking information in a structured manner, facilitating secure data transmission, and powering the next generation of apps that will bring interoperability ever closer to a reality.

TechTarget reported on how University of Utah Hospital’s five hospital/12 community clinic health network, and Intermountain Healthcare, also in Utah, successfully used APIs to develop customized interfaces and apps to improve accessibility and interoperability with their Epic and Cerner EHR systems.

Diagnostic Opportunities for Clinical Laboratories

As consumers gain increased access to their data and healthcare providers harness the current generation of third-party tools to streamline EHR use, vendors will continue to feel pressure to make interoperability a native feature of their EHR systems and reduce the need to rely on HIT teams for customization.

For pathology groups, medical laboratories, and other diagnosticians who interact with EHR systems daily, the impact of interoperability is clear. With the help of tech companies, and a shift in focus from government incentives programs, improved interoperability might soon offer innovative new uses for PHI in diagnosing and treating disease, while further improving the efficiency of clinical laboratories that face tightening budgets, reduced reimbursements, and greater competition.

—Jon Stone

Related Information:

Why EHR Data Interoperability Is Such a Mess in 3 Charts

EHR Incentive Program Status Report April 2018

New FDA App Streamlines EHR Patient Data Collection for Researchers

AAFP Nudges ONC toward EHR Interoperability

A New Breed of Interoperable EHR Apps Is Coming, but Slowly

Top Interoperability Questions to Consider during EHR Selection

EHR Design, Interoperability Top List of Physician Pain Points

2018 Survey of America’s Physicians: Practice Patterns & Perspectives

ONC: 93% of Hospitals Have Adopted Most Recent EHR Criteria, but Most Lag in Interoperability

Open Standards and Health Care Transformation: It’s Finally Delivering on the Value It Promised

Apple’s Update of Its Mobile Health App Consolidates Data from Multiple EHRs and Makes It Easier to Push Clinical Laboratory Data to Patients

EHR Systems Continue to Cause Burnout, Physician Dissatisfaction, and Decreased Face-to-Face Patient Care

 

Future EHR Systems Could Impact Clinical Laboratories by Offering Cloud Services and Full Access to Patients on Mobile Devices

Future EHRs will focus on efficiency, machine learning, and cloud services—improving how physicians and medical laboratories interact with the systems to support precision medicine and streamlined workflows

When the next generation of electronic health record (EHR) systems reaches the market, they will have advanced features that include cloud-based services and the ability to collect data from and communicate with patients using mobile devices. These new developments will provide clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups with new opportunities to create value with their lab testing services.

Proposed Improvements and Key Trends

Experts with EHR developers Epic Systems, Allscripts, Accenture, and drchrono spoke recently with Healthcare IT News about future platform initiatives and trends they feel will shape their next generation of EHR offerings.

They include:

  • Automation analytics and human-centered designs for increased efficiency and to help reduce physician burnout;
  • Improved feature parity across mobile and computer EHR interfaces to provide patients, physicians, and medical laboratories with access to information across a range of technologies and locations;
  • Integration of machine learning and predictive modeling to improve analytics and allow for better implementation of genomics-informed medicine and population health features; and
  • A shift toward cloud-hosted EHR solutions with support for application programming interfaces (APIs) designed for specific healthcare facilities that reduce IT overhead and make EHR systems accessible to smaller practices and facilities.

Should these proposals move forward, future generations of EHR platforms could transform from simple data storage/retrieval systems into critical tools physicians and medical laboratories use to facilitate communications and support decision-making in real time.

And, cloud-based EHRs with access to clinical labs’ APIs could enable those laboratories to communicate with and receive data from EHR systems with greater efficiency. This would eliminate yet another bottleneck in the decision-making process, and help laboratories increase volumes and margins through reduced documentation and data management overhead.

Cloud-based EHRs and Potential Pitfalls

Cloud-based EHRs rely on cloud computing, where IT resources are shared among multiple entities over the Internet. Such EHRs are highly scalable and allow end users to save money by hiring third-party IT services, rather than maintaining expensive IT staff.

Kipp Webb, MD, provider practice lead and Chief Clinical Innovation Officer at Accenture told Healthcare IT News that several EHR vendors are only a few years out on releasing cloud-based inpatient/outpatient EHR systems capable of meeting the needs of full-service medical centers.

While such a system would mean existing health networks would not need private infrastructure and dedicate IT teams to manage EHR system operations, a major shift in how next-gen systems are deployed and maintained could lead to potential interoperability and data transmission concerns. At least in the short term.

Yet, the transition also could lead to improved flexibility and connectivity between health networks and data providers—such as clinical laboratories and pathologist groups. This would be achieved through application programming interfaces (APIs) that enable computer systems to talk to each other and exchange data much more efficiently.

“Perhaps one of the biggest ways having a fully cloud-based EHR will change the way we as an industry operate will be enabled API access.” Daniel Kivatinos, COO and founder of drchrono, told Healthcare IT News. “You will be able to add other partners into the mix that just weren’t available before when you have a local EHR install only.”

Paul Black, CEO of Allscripts, believes these changes will likely require more than upgrading existing software or hardware. “The industry needs an entirely new approach to the EHR,” he told Healthcare IT News. “We’re seeing a huge need for the EHR to be mobile, cloud-based, and comprehensive to streamline workflow and get smarter with every use.” (Photo copyright: Allscripts.)

Reducing Physician Burnout through Human-Centered Design

As Dark Daily reported last year, EHRs have been identified as contributing to physician burnout, increased dissatisfaction, and decreased face-to-face interactions with patients.

Combined with the increased automation, Carl Dvorak, President of Epic Systems, notes next-gen EHR changes hold the potential to streamline the communication of orders, laboratory testing data, and information relevant to patient care. They could help physicians reach treatment decisions faster and provide laboratories with more insight, so they can suggest appropriate testing pathways for each episode of care.

“[Automation analytics] holds the key to unlocking some of the secrets to physician well-being,” Dvorak told Healthcare IT News. “For example, we can avoid work being unnecessarily diverted to physicians when it could be better managed by others.”

Black echoes similar benefits, saying, “We believe using human-centered design will transform the way physicians experience and interact with technology, as well as improve provider wellness.”

Some might question the success of the first wave of EHR systems. Though primarily built to address healthcare reform requirements, these systems provided critical feedback and data to EHR developers focused not on simply fulfilling regulatory requirements, but on meeting the needs of patients and care providers as well.

If these next-generations systems can help improve the quality of data recording, storage, and transmission, while also reducing physician burnout, they will have come a long way from the early EHRs. For medical laboratory professionals, these changes will likely impact how orders are received and lab results are reported back to doctors in the future. Thus, it’s worth monitoring these developments.

—Jon Stone

Related Information:

Next-Gen EHRs: Epic, Allscripts and Others Reveal Future of Electronic Health Records

Next-Gen IT Infrastructure: A Nervous System Backed by Analytics and Context

EHR Systems Continue to Cause Burnout, Physician Dissatisfaction, and Decreased Face-to-Face Patient Care

Genetic Testing as Part of Primary Care and Precision Medicine is Underway at NorthShore University HealthSystem and Geisinger Health

Both health systems will use their EHRs to track genetic testing data and plan to bring genetic data to primary care physicians

Clinical laboratories and pathology groups face a big challenge in how to get appropriate genetic and molecular data into electronic health record (EHR) systems in ways that are helpful for physicians. Precision medicine faces many barriers and this is one of the biggest. Aside from the sheer enormity of the data, there’s the question of making it useful and accessible for patient care. Thus, when two major healthcare systems resolve to accomplish this with their EHRs, laboratory managers and pathologists should take notice.

NorthShore University HealthSystem in Illinois and Geisinger Health System in Pennsylvania and New Jersey are working to make genetic testing part of primary care. And both reached similar conclusions regarding the best way for primary care physicians to make use of the information.

One area of common interest is pharmacogenomics.

At NorthShore, two genetic testing programs—MedClueRx and the Genetic and Wellness Assessment—provide doctors with more information about how their patients metabolize certain drugs and whether or not their medical and family histories suggest they need further, more specific genetic testing.

“We’re not trying to make all of our primary care physicians into genomic experts. That is a difficult strategy that really isn’t scalable. But we’re giving them enough tools to help them feel comfortable,” Peter Hulick, MD, Director of the Center for Personalized Medicine at NorthShore, told Healthcare IT News.

Conversely, Geisinger has made genomic testing an automated part of primary care. When patients visit their primary care physicians, they are asked to sign a release and undergo whole genome sequencing. An article in For the Record describes Geisinger’s program:

“The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics classifies 59 genes as clinically actionable, with an additional 21 others recommended by Geisinger. If a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant is found in one of those 80 genes, the patient and the primary care provider are notified.”

William Andrew Faucett (left) is Director of Policy and Education, Office of the Chief Scientific Officer at Geisinger Health; and Peter Hulick, MD (right), is Director of the Center for Personalized Medicine at NorthShore University HealthSystem. Both are leading programs at their respective healthcare networks to improve precision medicine and primary care by including genetic testing data and accessibility to it in their patients’ EHRs. (Photo copyrights: Geisinger/NorthShore University HealthSystem.)

The EHR as the Way to Access Genetic Test Results

Both NorthShore and Geisinger selected their EHRs for making important genetic information accessible to primary care physicians, as well as an avenue for tracking that information over time.

Hulick told Healthcare IT News that NorthShore decided to make small changes to their existing Epic EHR that would enable seemingly simple but actually complex actions to take place. For example, tracking the results of a genetic test within the EHR. According to Hulick, making the genetic test results trackable creates a “variant repository,” also known as a Clinical Data Repository.

“Once you have that, you can start to link it to other information that’s known about the patient: family history status, etc.,” he explained. “And you can start to build an infrastructure around it and use some of the tools for clinical decision support that are used in other areas: drug/drug interactions, reminders for flu vaccinations, and you can start to build on those decision support tools but apply them to genomics.”

Like NorthShore, Geisinger is also using its EHR to make genetic testing information available to primary care physician when a problem variant is identified. They use EHR products from both Epic and Cerner and are working with both companies to streamline and simplify the processes related to genetic testing. When a potentially problematic variant is found, it is listed in the EHR’s problem list, similar to other health issues.

Geisinger has developed a reporting system called GenomeCOMPASS, which notifies patients of their results and provides related information. It also enables patients to connect with a geneticist. GenomeCOMPASS has a physician-facing side where primary care doctors receive the results and have access to more information.

Andrew Faucett, Senior Investigator (Professor) and Director of Policy and Education, Office of the Chief Scientific Officer at Geisinger, compares the interpretation of genetic testing to any other kind of medical testing. “If a patient gets an MRI, the primary care physicians doesn’t interpret it—the radiologist does,” adding, “Doctors want to help patients follow the recommendations of the experts,” he told For the Record.

The Unknown Factor

Even though researchers regularly make new discoveries in genomics, physicians practicing today have had little, if any, training on how to incorporate genetics into their patients’ care. Combine that lack of knowledge and training with the current lack of EHR interoperability and the challenges in using genetic testing for precision medicine multiply to a staggering degree.

One thing that is certain: the scientific community will continue to gather knowledge that can be applied to improving the health of patients. Medical pathology laboratories will play a critical role in both testing and helping ensure results are useful and accessible, now and in the future.

—Dava Stewart

Related Information:

Introducing “Genomics and Precision Health”

How NorthShore Tweaked Its Epic EHR to Put Precision Medicine into Routine Clinical Workflows

Precise, Purposeful Health Care

Next-Generation Laboratory Information Management Systems Will Deliver Medical Laboratory Test Results and Patient Data to Point of Care, Improving Outcomes, Efficiency, and Revenue

CMS Finalizes Rule Rebranding ‘Meaningful Use’ Program to ‘Promoting Interoperability’

Ongoing federal regulatory push for EHR interoperability requires medical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups to have strategies for ensuring seamless interfaces with providers and hospitals

What difference does a name make? Clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups soon may know the answer to that question following the renaming of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) “Meaningful Use” program to “Promoting Interoperability” (PI).

CMS first announced the rebranding in April as part of a proposed rule aimed at transforming the Meaningful Use aspect of the federal Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act. HITECH has been Medicare’s roadmap to electronic health record (EHR) implementation and interoperability since it was enacted in 2009.

The final rule arrived on August 2, 2018, and it may impact how clinical laboratories interface with provider and hospital EHRs.

Removing Obstacles to Quality Patient Care

In the news release outlining the updates to Medicare payment policies and rates under the Inpatient Prospective Payment System and the Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System, CMS states the “overhaul” of the meaningful use program will:

  • Make the program more flexible and less burdensome;
  • Emphasize measures that require the exchange of health information between providers and patients; and,
  • Incentivize providers to make it easier for patients to obtain their medical records electronically.

“We’re excited to make these changes to ensure care will focus on the patient, not on needless paperwork,” CMS Administrator Seema Verma stated in the news release. “We’ve listened to patients and their doctors who urged us to remove the obstacles getting in the way of quality care and positive health outcomes. Today’s final rule reflects public feedback on CMS proposals issued in April and the agency’s patient-driven priorities of improving the quality and safety of care, advancing health information exchange and usability, and removing outdated or redundant regulation on healthcare providers to make way for innovation and greater value.” (Photo copyright: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.)

According to a CMS fact sheet, key provisions of the overhaul include:

  • The rule finalized an EHR reporting period to a minimum of any continuous 90-day period in each of calendar years 2019 and 2020 for new and returning participants attesting to CMS or their State Medicaid agency;
  • For the Medicare Promoting Interoperability Program, the rule finalized a new performance-based scoring methodology consisting of a smaller set of objectives that CMS states will provide a more flexible, less-burdensome structure, allowing eligible hospitals and critical access hospitals (CAHs) to place their focus back on patients;
  • CMS finalized two new e-Prescribing measures related to e-prescribing of opioids (Schedule II controlled substances); and,
  • Beginning with an EHR reporting period in CY 2019, all eligible hospitals and CAHs under the Medicare and Medicaid PI programs will be required to use the 2015 Edition of Certified EHR Technology;
  • CMS finalized changes to measures, including removing certain measures CMS believes do not emphasize interoperability and the electronic exchange of health information.

According to CMS, about 3,300 acute care hospitals and 420 long-term care hospitals will be subject to the final rule, which takes effect October 1. Obviously, medical laboratories servicing these healthcare organizations will be similarly affected.

Rebranding More than a Name Change

Healthcare Informatics analyzed the 2,593-page final rule explaining that the “core emphasis” of the meaningful use overhaul is “on advancing health data exchange among providers.”

The initial proposal in April, according to Healthcare Informatics, invited stakeholder feedback through a request for information on the possibility of revising CMS’ “Conditions of Participation” for hospitals by requiring providers to electronically transfer medically necessary information following a patient discharge or transfer. The final rule, however, did not include that change.

Instead, the CMS Fact Sheet on the rule states the April request for information was “to obtain feedback on positive solutions to better achieve interoperability, or the sharing of healthcare data between providers, which will inform next steps in advancing this critical initiative.”

Rebranding meaningful use is CMS’s first step in implementing core pieces of the Administration’s MyHealthEData Initiative to strengthen interoperability. In remarks during the ONC Interoperability Forum in Washington, DC, CMS Administrator Seema Verma described the rebranding decision as “much more than a name change” and signaled future CMS actions.

“It is a change in direction for the programs—from programs that support the adoption of health IT, to programs that promote interoperability and patient access to data,” she explained. “To avoid payment reductions and gain incentives, doctors and hospitals will have to give patients electronic access to their health records. We are also considering whether CMS should require—as a condition of participation in the Medicare program—that providers share data with patients in a universal electronic format and hope to share more information on that soon.”

The recent changes follow passage of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, which included a provision relaxing meaningful-use requirements. Though the legislation affects only hospitals and outpatient Medicaid providers, Robert Tennant, Director of Health Information Technology Policy for the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), declared the revision a “huge win” for providers.

“I don’t think the government recognized how difficult it would be to move from stage 1 to stage 2 to stage 3 [meaningful use] requirements and the significant costs involved,” Tennant stated told Modern Healthcare. “We hope that it signals an interest in Congress in having the administration and HHS (Federal Health and Human Services) not make these quality reporting programs so onerous that it results in large swaths of providers not being successful.”

Clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups should be aware that interoperability between their laboratory information systems and the EHRs of providers and hospitals continues to be important. Although the term “Meaningful Use” is to be supplanted by “Promoting Interoperability,” the ability to move patient health information seamlessly among providers continues to be a major goal of this country’s healthcare system.

—Andrea Downing Peck

Related Information:

CMS Finalizes Changes to Empower Patients and Reduce Administrative Burden

In Proposed MU Rebranding Rule, CMS Raises the Interoperability Stakes

Fact Sheet: Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Medicare Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) and Long-Term Acute Care Hospital (LTCH) Prospective Payment System Final Rule (CMS-1694-F)

H.R. 1892: Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018

Printable PDF: Final Rule (CMS-1694-F)

Speech: Remarks by Administrator Seema Verma at the ONC Interoperability Forum in Washington, DC

Congress Budget Deal Relaxes Meaningful-Use Requirements

CMS Proposes Changes to Empower Patients and Reduce Administrative Burden

CMS Proposes Meaningful Use Changes to Promote Interoperability

 

 

;