Comments
Meaningful Use Deadlines Clash With Software Best Practices
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
SteveRobbin
IW Pick
100%
0%
SteveRobbin,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/10/2014 | 9:19:24 PM
Personal experience
I am working as an EHR consultant with an EHR Vendor Nortec Software Inc. I completely agree with the author because i know personally that how much problems are going to be arrive due to this clash. Because the most imprtant factor is also the most time gainning,training. Tranning of human resource to use the software properly.
batye
50%
50%
batye,
User Rank: Ninja
6/2/2014 | 2:47:09 AM
Re: John Halamka on Meaningful Use Extension, need for further simplification
thanks for a link, interesting to know... 
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
5/29/2014 | 11:09:42 AM
John Halamka on Meaningful Use Extension, need for further simplification
Noted health IT CIO John Halamka has posted his analysis of the schedule change and the reaction from his peers here:

http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/2014/05/early-reaction-to-electronic-health.html

Key observation: "layering fixes on top of existing Meaningful Use regulation, some of which was written by CMS and some of which was written by ONC creates too much complexity.   I have direct access to the authors of the regulations and email them on a daily basis.   It's getting to the point that even the authors cannot answer questions about the regulations because there are too many layers."
fpoggio600
50%
50%
fpoggio600,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/28/2014 | 9:22:27 PM
MU Deadlines and buggy software
I have two observations:

1) It makes absolutely no difference whether you deploy software on the cloud or turnkey. If your product is buggy on a turnkey deployment you nick only one client. On a cloud you nick all clients. Buggy apps know no difference in platform.

2) The certification proces (of which I have been through over 30) is constantly watching for buggy software and unstable product. If the tester sees this happen more than once they can 'flunk' you immediately. So if you make it thru the certificatin process your code must be stable. If after you deliver it, it is not stable then you must have made additional revisions after certification that can't be blamed on the certification process.

Frank Poggio

The Kelzon Group

KelzonGroup.com
ThemosPentakalos
50%
50%
ThemosPentakalos,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/28/2014 | 7:17:43 PM
Re: Regarding the recent proposed changes
David, we have to go by the numbers already posted. As of  May 1'st, CMS published that only 4 hospitals and 50 providers had attested for stage 2. It's still early but those numbers paint a bleak picture.

Let's see how this all plays out!

-Themos
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
5/28/2014 | 6:19:30 PM
Re: Regarding the recent proposed changes
So how close to the breaking point do you think most healthcare organizations are?
ThemosPentakalos
100%
0%
ThemosPentakalos,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/28/2014 | 5:50:55 PM
Regarding the recent proposed changes
At ChiroTouch, we have been working on implementing the new 2014 requirements for stage 1 and stage 2 for 8 months and were, in fact, one of very few software companies to get certified in time. To our knowledge, roughly 10% of software vendors are certified thus-far and there are only a few weeks left before the July 1 deadline.

Whether there is a delay or not, this engineering effort had to happen. If we knew of this delay earlier, we would have been postponing the scrambling to next year. Furthermore, the proposal calls for a 60-day review cycle so in a sense people that are attesting for the first time can't really wait. There is always the possibility that they wait and not start on time. If the proposal is declined, these doctors/hospitals would have to incur a penalty as they should, according to the rules, start operating under meaningful use measures no-later-than July 1. The government decision doesn't come out until the end of July.

The biggest risk for the government is that they wind up making this too complicated from an operational and technological perspective, at which point the whole stimulus program falls flat on its face. Clinical offices and hospitals run as businesses. At some point, the pain and cost of compliance outweighs the financial benefit and the program falls apart as a result of non-compliance.
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
5/28/2014 | 9:37:32 AM
Does enterprise health IT need to move faster?
Healthcare organizations are often rapped for being behind other industries in the use of IT, which is one reason the Meaningful Use program has often prescribed a faster pace. Is it appropriate to expect healthcare organizations to move faster? The Facebook mantra of "Go fast, break things" doesn't sound so great in the context of healthcare. Lagging on information security, as pointed to in our story comparing healthcare to retail, but whether rushing new features into production helps or hurts patient safety / healthcare quality is debatable.
Alison_Diana
50%
50%
Alison_Diana,
User Rank: Author
5/28/2014 | 9:32:37 AM
Over Reach
While the goals are laudable and hindsight's always simple, I'd imagine CMS now wishes it had created a less ambitious, much more manageable set of schedules for this complex series of rollouts. One thing that struck me over and over is wondering who was involved in recommending these timelines from an IT perspective, what experience did they have in HIT, and how much weight was their insight given into the development of these schedules. From the get-go, it was apparent healthcare providers wouldn't have adequate time for testing; as a result, they'll have expensive fixes (perhaps as costly as ripping and replacing EHRs, which we're seeing already).

However, if the government had not stepped in I sincerely doubt most healthcare orgs would have adopted EHRs. We must be careful about how and who accesses 'deidentified' and 'anonymized' data -- and ensure it truly meets those classifications -- but providing patients with access to their own records is certainly a big step forward in a market that was well behind most, if not all, other verticals in basic IT adoption.


IT's Reputation: What the Data Says
IT's Reputation: What the Data Says
InformationWeek's IT Perception Survey seeks to quantify how IT thinks it's doing versus how the business really views IT's performance in delivering services - and, more important, powering innovation. Our results suggest IT leaders should worry less about whether they're getting enough resources and more about the relationships they have with business unit peers.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest September 24, 2014
Start improving branch office support by tapping public and private cloud resources to boost performance, increase worker productivity, and cut costs.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.