1 / 17

Meaningful Use Panel: Stage 3 Update Arthur Davidson, MD, MSPH Denver Public Health

Meaningful Use Panel: Stage 3 Update Arthur Davidson, MD, MSPH Denver Public Health Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Annual Conference Pasadena, CA June 10, 2013. Agenda. Overview of Stage 3 policy perspectives Review of HIT Policy Committee progress

Download Presentation

Meaningful Use Panel: Stage 3 Update Arthur Davidson, MD, MSPH Denver Public Health

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. Meaningful Use Panel: Stage 3 Update Arthur Davidson, MD, MSPH Denver Public Health Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Annual Conference Pasadena, CA June 10, 2013

  2. Agenda • Overview of Stage 3 policy perspectives • Review of HIT Policy Committee progress • Consolidation and Deeming • Public health agency opportunities: on-boarding • CSTE and member role during this phase

  3. Stages of Meaningful Use (MU)Improving Outcomes Stage 3 2016-17 Stage 2 2014-15 Stage 1 2011-13

  4. Original Principles for Stage 3 Recommendations • New model of care:support team-based, outcomes-oriented, population management • National health priorities: address National Prevention/Quality Strategies, Partnerships for Patients, and Million Hearts Campaign • Broad applicability(since MU is a floor) • Provider specialties (e.g., primary care, specialty care) • Patient health needs • Areas of the country • Not "topped out" or not already driven by market forces • Mature standardswidely adopted or could be widely adopted by 2016 (for stage 3)

  5. Lessons from Stages 1Implications for Stage 3

  6. Additional Goals for Stage 3 • Address key gaps (e.g., interoperability, patient engagement, reducing disparities) in EHR functionality that the market will not drive alone, but are essential for all providers: • to create level playing field • to create network effects • to fulfill need for a public good • Consolidation: combine MU objectives where higher level objective implies compliance with subsumed process objectives • Deeming: consider alternative pathways to meet performance and/or improvement thresholds; satisfaction of subset of relevant MU functionality implicitly required to achieve performance/improvement

  7. Proposed Stage 3 Population and Public Health MU Objectives/Criteria *EH= eligible hospital; EP=eligible Provider

  8. Consolidation Summary • 43 MU Workgroup objectives proposed in stage 3 Request for Comment (RFC) • Consolidated to 25 objectives • Assumptions • Full MU Workgroup will consider RFC feedback and update criteria • All criteria will be included in certification • Focus on advanced uses • e.g., recording data vs. use data • Give credit for MU objectives that should be standard of practice once passed stages 1 and 2 • Identify what needs to be “used” and certified

  9. Types of Consolidation • Advanced within concept of another objective • (no current PH example) • Duplicative concepts -objective becomes certification only • immunization forecasting -> clinical decision support • Demonstrated use and can trust that it will continue • patient lists, population management, ACO and quality reporting

  10. Consolidation Overview Quality, safety, reducing health disparities Engaging patients & families Improving care coordination Population & public health VDT ToC – Care summary Immunization registry eRx – formulary EH: Lab results EP Amendment CPOE - meds CPOE - referrals Syndromic Surveillance Test tracking Family Hx Amendment Prob, med, allg list CPOE - lab Electronic Lab Reproting Advanced directive Family Hx Structured lab Prob, med, allg list CDS Electronic notes Vitals Structured lab CDS for immun Smoking status Registries Pt list/dashboard Vitals Demographics Cancer registry Smoking status Reminders eRx transmission Specialty registry Demographics Comm preference Patient education HAI reports Comm preference Reconciliation EH: eMAR Case reports to PHA Inter prob list* Clinical summary Imaging results RxHx PDMP* Adverse event* Comm preference CPOE - rad CPOE - meds Secure Messaging Notify of health event Key: PGHD Care plan* Maintained Objective Identify clinical trials Referral loop Certification Criteria * Proposed for future stage of MU

  11. Deemed MU Objectives Deemed in Satisfaction of: • Clinical decision support • e-Prescribing – formulary, generic subs • Reminders • Electronic notes • Test tracking • Clinical summary • Patient education • Reconcile problems, meds, allergies • *View, download, transmit (VDT), consider adding if stage 2 reports good uptake • *Secure patient messaging, consider adding if stage 2 reports good uptake Remaining Items: • Advance directive • E- medication administration record • Imaging results • EH: provide lab results • Patient generated data • *View/download/transfer • *Secure patient messaging • Care summary • Care plan • Referral loop • Notification of health event • Immunization registry • Electronic laboratory reporting • Case reports to public health agency • Syndromic surveillance • Reporting to 2 registries • Adverse event reporting

  12. Stage 2 MU: On-Boarding EP/EH passes: Letter for attestation • Provider must: • register intent by the deadline • participate in on-boarding process • respond to PHA written requests for action within 30 days on two separate occasions. EP/EH Registration of intent Yes MU objective met? PH capable? No No EP/EH exclusion Yes Yes Provider acts? PH requests provider action PH on-boards EP/EH Yes No 1st Time Failure? Yes No EP/EH fails CMS Final Rule: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-09-04/pdf/2012-21050.pdf

  13. Stage 2 MU Public Health Reporting Requirements Task Force • Formed to discuss and develop consensus around standardization of the new processes across domains and across jurisdictions • Representatives from: • ASTHO, NACCHO, AIRA, ISDS, CSTE, JPHIT, NAACCR, state PHAs, ONC, CDC, PHII, others

  14. Registries Eligible Provider Eligible Hospital • BMI • CVD risk • Tobacco • Mental health Standard Data Warehouse Secure federated query Query Service Eligible Provider Eligible Hospital Secure federated query Secure Portal Standard Data Warehouse

  15. Query Health Pilots http://wiki.siframework.org/Query+Health+Pilots+Team

  16. CSTE Position Statements

  17. Conclusions • Stage 3 MU will push for improved outcomes with greater emphasis on health information exchange • Public health agencies will demonstrate their capacity/desire to participate through on-boarding in Stage 2 • CSTE can provide new data regarding functionality and standards to influence policy decisions • CSTE and its members have a unique opportunity to be more strategic, with cross-cutting approaches to informatics investments

More Related