1 / 19

HIT Policy Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup

HIT Policy Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup. Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Chair George Hripcsak, Columbia University, Co-Chair December 13, 2010. Workgroup Membership. Co-Chairs: Paul Tang Palo Alto Medical Foundation George Hripcsak Columbia University Members:

jaser
Download Presentation

HIT Policy Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HIT Policy CommitteeMeaningful Use Workgroup Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Chair George Hripcsak, Columbia University, Co-Chair December 13, 2010

  2. Workgroup Membership Co-Chairs: Paul Tang Palo Alto Medical Foundation George Hripcsak Columbia University Members: • David Bates Brigham & Women’s Hospital • Michael Barr American College of Physicians • Christine Bechtel National Partnership/Women & Families • Neil Calman Institute/Family Health • Art Davidson Denver Public Health • Marty Fattig Nemaha County Hospital • James Figge NY State Dept. of Health • Joe Francis Veterans Administration • David Lansky Pacific Business Group/Health • Deven McGraw Center/Democracy & Technology • Judy Murphy Aurora Health Care • Latanya Sweeney Carnegie Mellon University • Tony Trenkle CMS • Charlene Underwood Siemens

  3. Agenda • Recap process for development of stage 2 draft recommendations • Discussion draft of stage 2 recommendations • Timeline

  4. Developing Recommendations for Stage 2 (and 3)Deliberative Process • Hearings over past year: • Specialists; smaller practices and hospitals • State issues • Health care disparities • Patient and family engagement • Population and public health • Care coordination • CMS final rule on meaningful use • ONC final rule on EHR certification • MU WG deliberations on stage 2/3 criteria

  5. Principles Guiding Development of Draft Recommendations • Positioning stage 2 as stepping stone to stage 3 • Provides trajectory and roadmap • Move towards outcomes, where possible • Quality Measures WG concurrently soliciting HIT-sensitive clinical quality measures • Parsimony • Ensure functionality “floor” • Promote innovation • At this stage, draft recommendations to form basis for Request for Comment only • At least 2 more opportunities for full committee comment/feedback

  6. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 6

  7. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 7

  8. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 8

  9. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 9

  10. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 10

  11. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 11

  12. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 12

  13. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 13

  14. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 14

  15. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 15

  16. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 16

  17. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives 17

  18. Discussion DRAFT Meaningful Use Objectives

  19. MU Work Plan Timeline • Dec, 2010: refine draft MU criteria, prepare for RFC • Jan, 2011: release draft MU criteria RFC • Feb, 2011: collect RFC submissions • Mar, 2011: analyze RFC submissions and revise MU draft criteria • April, 2011: present revised draft MU criteria to HITPC • 2Q11: CMS report on initial MU submissions • 3Q11: Final HITPC recommendations on stage 2 MU • ~4Q11: CMS MU NPRM

More Related