Bloomberg BNA's Health IT Law & Industry Report brings you concise, comprehensive, and timely news and analysis of the regulatory, legal, and compliance issues surrounding our nation’s...
Federal programs to encourage the use of health information technology and improve the delivery of health care threaten to bog down providers with too many obligations to measure quality and performance outcomes, a panel of health care industry experts said June 28 at the National Health IT and Delivery System Transformation Summit.
Keith J. Figlioli, senior vice president for health care informatics at Premier Inc., said providers are being asked to measure performance and outcomes in so many different ways that they “are not really measuring anything.”
Figlioli said requiring providers to concentrate too much of their time on measurement reporting gets in the way of doing real clinical work, including doing better at coordinating and improving care for patients.
Instead, he said, federal policies for accountable care organizations, for example, should focus on simpler measures for population health indicators.
Mark J. Segal, vice president for government and industry affairs at GE Healthcare IT, said measuring performance and outcomes is essential to managing organizations. But, he added, the measures must “matter to the policy of the organization.”
“There's only so much capacity for measurement,” Segal said, and federally mandated measurement requirements should not “crowd out the organic needs of the organization.”
In other words, health care organizations should measure performance and outcomes in areas that have clinical significance for their practices and can aid in care delivery improvements, Segal said.
Likewise, Segal said performance and outcome measures should be generated from data already in electronic health records and should rely on data entered for clinical purposes, not data entered into systems solely to support measurement reporting requirements.
Figlioli noted that many EHR developers have not devoted much time to designing EHR products for the purposes of reporting quality and performance measures. Rather, the applications have been designed almost entirely with clinical support functions in mind. Now those vendors are trying to “catch up” with “meaningful use” requirements for quality reporting and measurement, he said.
The panelists agreed that it is not clear what IT capabilities accountable care organizations will need to successfully participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program and advance in the areas of coordinating patient care among multiple providers in multiple settings.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in April published a proposed rule (76 Fed. Reg. 19528) defining requirements for ACOs, including performance and quality measurement mandates, for participation in the Medicare Shared Savings Program. A leading health IT group in comments to CMS on the proposed rule said performance measurement and technology requirements for ACOs were too stringent and should be amended (see previous article).
Segal said the health care delivery community must evaluate what health IT should be able to do to support care coordination and clinical decisionmaking, in particular.
He also said technology tools should help providers “make patients sticky to the organization,” meaning health information technologies should help providers more easily track patients among other providers and care settings.
Segal said that while it is not fully known what the IT needs of ACOs are, or will be in the future, he said an “innovation engine” is in place to identify and meet provider needs.
He said he expects the private marketplace, as well as the federal meaningful use program, to generate solutions to IT needs as they arise among providers participating in ACOs.
William Bria, chief medical information officer for Shriners Hospital for Children in Tampa, Fla., noted that ACOs would need IT support beyond the functions of EHRs.
For example, health information exchange capabilities will be important to connecting providers in different practice locations.
By Kendra Casey Plank
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)