Good morning faithful MSO Solutions, LLC blogger fans!!! Please excuse our abscence in the next few weeks as we are VERY busy with a large Practice Management/EHR implemenation projects. While we may not have time to post updates, we do have time for any existing or new customers.
Please visit our website, MSO Solutions, LLC to view our services and see how we can help you improve your IT infrastructure!!!
~Jennifer
Information Technology Outsourcing
Showing posts with label EHR Implementation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EHR Implementation. Show all posts
Don't Forget The October 3 Deadline to Qualify for Meaningful Use Before the End of the Year!!
Published on Government Health IT (http://www.govhealthit.com/)
EHR incentive program ramps up to 90,000 providers
By Mary Mosquera
Created 2011-09-14 20:57
Physicians and hospitals signed up in droves in August to participate in the meaningful use incentive program, with 13,000 registering, a 30 percent jump from July, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
As of the end of August, a total of 90,000 eligible physicians, other professionals and hospitals are taking part in the Medicare and Medicaid electronic health records (EHR) incentive programs, said Robert Anthony, a specialist in CMS’ Office of e-Health Standards and Services.
In July, that total was 77,000 providers.
Drilling down into the numbers, CMS paid Medicare incentives to 1,000 physicians in August, nearly double the number of clinicians paid in July, which was double the number of those paid in June, he said. About half of all physicians who have been paid under the Medicare program were paid in August. Physicians who demonstrate the first stage of meaningful use in 2011 or 2012 can receive $18,000.
“When we launched in April, we had a trickle, and that trickle is turning into a faucet opening up a little more. If this trend holds, we’ll have the faucet fully going,” Anthony said at the Sept. 14 meeting of the Health IT Policy Committee, which advises the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT.
Among evidence that has emerged is that providers across the age spectrum are participating in the meaningful use program, “despite the sentiment that was voiced that older physicians wouldn’t be interested since they are close to retiring,” he said. However, he cautioned that the sample is still small.
On the Medicaid side, 23 states have opened their incentive program as of August. When larger states, such as California, start up their programs at the end of the year, “Medicaid payments will spike quickly,” said Robert Tagalicod, director of CMS’ Office of e-Health Standards and Services.
Close to 1,300 physicians and other eligible professionals received payments, 23 percent more than in July. In August, $150 million in Medicaid incentives were paid, a little less than half of the total year to date, Anthony said.
CMS issued a total of $264 million in payments in August, twice as much as paid out in July, and $652 million for the year to date, he said.
ONC and CMS are coordinating more of their activities and sharing more data, such as about the nearly 100,000 providers who have signed up to work with the 62 regional health IT extensions centers across the country, Tagalicod said.
CMS will be able to “match up provider numbers to the data on geography, practice size and health IT vendor” to understand who is meeting meaningful use and where, he said. The extension centers, which ONC has funded, aim to assist physicians overcome the hurdles of deploying certified EHRs and becoming meaningful users.
As of the end of August, a total of 90,000 eligible physicians, other professionals and hospitals are taking part in the Medicare and Medicaid electronic health records (EHR) incentive programs, said Robert Anthony, a specialist in CMS’ Office of e-Health Standards and Services.
In July, that total was 77,000 providers.
Drilling down into the numbers, CMS paid Medicare incentives to 1,000 physicians in August, nearly double the number of clinicians paid in July, which was double the number of those paid in June, he said. About half of all physicians who have been paid under the Medicare program were paid in August. Physicians who demonstrate the first stage of meaningful use in 2011 or 2012 can receive $18,000.
“When we launched in April, we had a trickle, and that trickle is turning into a faucet opening up a little more. If this trend holds, we’ll have the faucet fully going,” Anthony said at the Sept. 14 meeting of the Health IT Policy Committee, which advises the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT.
Among evidence that has emerged is that providers across the age spectrum are participating in the meaningful use program, “despite the sentiment that was voiced that older physicians wouldn’t be interested since they are close to retiring,” he said. However, he cautioned that the sample is still small.
On the Medicaid side, 23 states have opened their incentive program as of August. When larger states, such as California, start up their programs at the end of the year, “Medicaid payments will spike quickly,” said Robert Tagalicod, director of CMS’ Office of e-Health Standards and Services.
Close to 1,300 physicians and other eligible professionals received payments, 23 percent more than in July. In August, $150 million in Medicaid incentives were paid, a little less than half of the total year to date, Anthony said.
CMS issued a total of $264 million in payments in August, twice as much as paid out in July, and $652 million for the year to date, he said.
ONC and CMS are coordinating more of their activities and sharing more data, such as about the nearly 100,000 providers who have signed up to work with the 62 regional health IT extensions centers across the country, Tagalicod said.
CMS will be able to “match up provider numbers to the data on geography, practice size and health IT vendor” to understand who is meeting meaningful use and where, he said. The extension centers, which ONC has funded, aim to assist physicians overcome the hurdles of deploying certified EHRs and becoming meaningful users.
Links:
[1] http://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/01_Overview.asp#TopOfPage
[2] http://govhealthit.com/news/cms-counts-early-ehr-incentive-adopters
[3] http://www.govhealthit.com/news/cms-explains-how-get-paid-ehr-incentives
[4] http://www.govhealthit.com/../../../../../../news/qa-how-meaningful-use-clashing-icd-10
[1] http://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/01_Overview.asp#TopOfPage
[2] http://govhealthit.com/news/cms-counts-early-ehr-incentive-adopters
[3] http://www.govhealthit.com/news/cms-explains-how-get-paid-ehr-incentives
[4] http://www.govhealthit.com/../../../../../../news/qa-how-meaningful-use-clashing-icd-10
5 Keys to EMR Usability
Published on Healthcare IT News (http://www.healthcareitnews.com/)
5 keys to EMR usability
By Michelle McNickle, Web Content Producer
Created 09/06/2011
Usability: the concept is often at the root of slow adoption of EMR systems, and rightfully so. Although effective training and implementation methods affect user adoption rates as well, poor usability has a strong impact on productivity, error rate, and user satisfaction.
And usability should be considered more than just user satisfaction, according to Rosemarie Nelson, principal of the MGMA Consulting Group. The concept is far more complex, and to Nelson, it’s synonymous with workflow integration. “Too much attention is given to the number of clicks and screens, when what should be considered is how and when information is presented,” she said.
Dr. Steve Waldren, MD, Director of the American Academy of Family Physicians’ Center for Health IT, explained that when it comes to understanding usability, it’s essential to consider utility as well. “Usability is subjective in many ways,” he said. “It has to do with the functionality of the system. Utility is making sure the system does the things you need it to do.”
[See also: Usability key to wide EMR adoption.]
So what determines if an EMR is useable? Better yet, how can prospective users ensure a system won’t result in headaches over lost productivity? According to Nelson, the first step is to recognize no system is perfect.
“The problem for most providers is they, nor their vendor implementation team, look for that commonsense template: the one that fits a majority of patient visits, not the ‘perfect’ template that allows visits for all patients to be documented. There is just too much variation to expect 100 percent.”
With that in mind, here are five additional elements to consider when it comes to EMR usability.
Supportiveness: According to both Waldren and Nelson, the system should support workflow. “It’s not about a single user,” said Waldren. “It’s about an entire practice.” Waldren suggests presenting vendors with three clinical scenarios: the most common instances at a practice, the most challenging instances at a practice, and the most number of interactions among staff. That way, it’s evident how the system supports specific workflow. “I suggest doing two sets of the scenarios,” he said. “One that you present the vendor ahead of time, and the second during the demo. Then you can see the system’s flexibility to take care of each scenario.”
Flexibility: Nelson considers flexibility to be key, not just within the system, but also with those using it. “Usability is all about integrating a tool into a provider’s day,” she said. To illustrate, she suggests considering the evolution of the phone. “We started with one phone, then we add extensions,” she said. “Then, we came up with portable phones because our work is mobile. We found that we needed phones to follow us, not us having to go to the phone.” Since usability can become complicated, she said, the way a provider uses the tool might evolve as he/she becomes comfortable with improvements in workflow and operational efficiencies. Therefore, it’s essential to change how he/she interacts with the device and the software.
Continued on next page.
Ease of Learning/ Naturalness: Is the system burdensome and clunky? To be sure it isn’t, Nelson suggests providers take a close look at how they interact with their nurses when using the EMR in the demo. This goes for both patient encounters in the office and on the telephone, as well as incoming documentation, like test results and correspondence. “If it appears cumbersome or redundant, [physicians won’t] achieve the intended benefits because [they] just won’t use those features,” she said. “The best way to observe and understand the dance between nurse and provider is by taking a trip to see the EMR in operation at a practice.” Both the nurse and the provider should visit the site, said Nelson, to fully experience the change they’ll have to adapt to in their own office setting.
Effectiveness: Although an EMR’s effectiveness to streamline workflow is obvious when considering its usability, Waldren said providers should also consider the changes taking place in healthcare. “The current is based on volume: patients, procedures, etc.,” he said. “Patients aren’t connected. The future is value-based and consumer directed. Clinical data will be used to measure quality.” With that in mind, Waldren says it’s essential to find a system that will effectively straddle both worlds.
Efficiency: To Nelson, an EMR should save time, and even the smallest aspects of a system could mean wasted hours. However, some EMRs do a good job of allowing a nurse and a provider to easily work on the same computer station with fast log-out/log-in. “This keeps the active patient online to allow for the concurrent work of the provider and nurse. Even something as simple as keeping the electronic chart ‘open’ on the desktop can be a boon to workflow; a nurse or provider is often in one patient’s chart when a phone call interrupts their work, and they need to open another chart. But, of course, they don’t want to lose the one they are working on.”
One thing is for certain when it comes to EMRs and their usability: it’s an evolution that’s essentially controlled by the user. “EMR usability must evolve similarly in that as we try to use it within our day, we can see where improvements can be made,” said Nelson.
And usability should be considered more than just user satisfaction, according to Rosemarie Nelson, principal of the MGMA Consulting Group. The concept is far more complex, and to Nelson, it’s synonymous with workflow integration. “Too much attention is given to the number of clicks and screens, when what should be considered is how and when information is presented,” she said.
Dr. Steve Waldren, MD, Director of the American Academy of Family Physicians’ Center for Health IT, explained that when it comes to understanding usability, it’s essential to consider utility as well. “Usability is subjective in many ways,” he said. “It has to do with the functionality of the system. Utility is making sure the system does the things you need it to do.”
[See also: Usability key to wide EMR adoption.]
So what determines if an EMR is useable? Better yet, how can prospective users ensure a system won’t result in headaches over lost productivity? According to Nelson, the first step is to recognize no system is perfect.
“The problem for most providers is they, nor their vendor implementation team, look for that commonsense template: the one that fits a majority of patient visits, not the ‘perfect’ template that allows visits for all patients to be documented. There is just too much variation to expect 100 percent.”
With that in mind, here are five additional elements to consider when it comes to EMR usability.
Supportiveness: According to both Waldren and Nelson, the system should support workflow. “It’s not about a single user,” said Waldren. “It’s about an entire practice.” Waldren suggests presenting vendors with three clinical scenarios: the most common instances at a practice, the most challenging instances at a practice, and the most number of interactions among staff. That way, it’s evident how the system supports specific workflow. “I suggest doing two sets of the scenarios,” he said. “One that you present the vendor ahead of time, and the second during the demo. Then you can see the system’s flexibility to take care of each scenario.”
Flexibility: Nelson considers flexibility to be key, not just within the system, but also with those using it. “Usability is all about integrating a tool into a provider’s day,” she said. To illustrate, she suggests considering the evolution of the phone. “We started with one phone, then we add extensions,” she said. “Then, we came up with portable phones because our work is mobile. We found that we needed phones to follow us, not us having to go to the phone.” Since usability can become complicated, she said, the way a provider uses the tool might evolve as he/she becomes comfortable with improvements in workflow and operational efficiencies. Therefore, it’s essential to change how he/she interacts with the device and the software.
Continued on next page.
Ease of Learning/ Naturalness: Is the system burdensome and clunky? To be sure it isn’t, Nelson suggests providers take a close look at how they interact with their nurses when using the EMR in the demo. This goes for both patient encounters in the office and on the telephone, as well as incoming documentation, like test results and correspondence. “If it appears cumbersome or redundant, [physicians won’t] achieve the intended benefits because [they] just won’t use those features,” she said. “The best way to observe and understand the dance between nurse and provider is by taking a trip to see the EMR in operation at a practice.” Both the nurse and the provider should visit the site, said Nelson, to fully experience the change they’ll have to adapt to in their own office setting.
Effectiveness: Although an EMR’s effectiveness to streamline workflow is obvious when considering its usability, Waldren said providers should also consider the changes taking place in healthcare. “The current is based on volume: patients, procedures, etc.,” he said. “Patients aren’t connected. The future is value-based and consumer directed. Clinical data will be used to measure quality.” With that in mind, Waldren says it’s essential to find a system that will effectively straddle both worlds.
Efficiency: To Nelson, an EMR should save time, and even the smallest aspects of a system could mean wasted hours. However, some EMRs do a good job of allowing a nurse and a provider to easily work on the same computer station with fast log-out/log-in. “This keeps the active patient online to allow for the concurrent work of the provider and nurse. Even something as simple as keeping the electronic chart ‘open’ on the desktop can be a boon to workflow; a nurse or provider is often in one patient’s chart when a phone call interrupts their work, and they need to open another chart. But, of course, they don’t want to lose the one they are working on.”
One thing is for certain when it comes to EMRs and their usability: it’s an evolution that’s essentially controlled by the user. “EMR usability must evolve similarly in that as we try to use it within our day, we can see where improvements can be made,” said Nelson.
Links:
[1] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/usability-key-wide-emr-adoption
[1] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/usability-key-wide-emr-adoption
Electronic Health Record Implementation and Consulting
Is your medical practice ready to update your old paper charts into an electronic health record?? Does the thought of that enormous task have you running for retirement?? If so, contact MSO Solutuions, LLC. We are a company in Syracuse, New York that offers EHR Consulting Services by knowledgable staff, with excellent prices and superior customer service!!
Some of the services we offer are:
*Assisting with the creation of your Request for Proposal (RFP)
*Pricing and Negotiation assistance for the EHR contract
*Workflow Analysis of Your Practice to Improve Efficiency and Lower Costs
*Provide Long-Term IT Support for Your Network
While we do NOT sell a specific EHR, we will assist you in the process of "weeding out" the good from the bad!!
Give us a call today!!
Some of the services we offer are:
*Assisting with the creation of your Request for Proposal (RFP)
*Pricing and Negotiation assistance for the EHR contract
*Workflow Analysis of Your Practice to Improve Efficiency and Lower Costs
*Provide Long-Term IT Support for Your Network
While we do NOT sell a specific EHR, we will assist you in the process of "weeding out" the good from the bad!!
Give us a call today!!
The 7 Deadly Sins of EMR Implementation
Published on Healthcare IT News (http://www.healthcareitnews.com)
The 7 Deadly Sins of EMR implementation
By Michelle McNickle, Web Content Producer
Created 09/07/2011
Congratulations! You've committed to an EMR, which is an accomplishment in itself. But the hardest part is still to come: getting it to work.
From failing to plan to skipping out on training, many mistakes can be made during the implementation process. And although they may not be as juicy as wrath, envy or lust, the Seven Deadly Sins of EMR implementation could wreak just as much havoc.
Steve Waldren, MD, director of the American Academy of Family Physicians' Center for Health IT, and Rosemarie Nelson, principal of the MGMA Consulting Group, gave us the worst sins providers can commit during EMR implementation.
1. Not doing your homework: Avoiding supplier problems means background research and thorough evaluations of vendors and products. And beware: vendors tend to make promises they can't keep. According to Waldren, it's important to get the specifics down on paper. "Often, a doctor will ask if [an EMR] can do this or that, and a vendor will say yes. Then, they're surprised when in reality, it doesn't. Doctors need to make sure all expectations are met in writing."
2. Assuming the EMR is a magic bullet: It's important to remember the EMR is a conversion, not an upgrade. Although the system will save you time and money in the long run, Waldren warns it isn't an instant fix to issues in the workplace. "Most people think an EMR solves problems," he said. "But an EMR will only amplify problems that already exist in the practice."
3. Not including nurses in the planning stages: Nelson says doctors tend to think a new EMR is all about them. "They don't think about how much the nurse preps the chart, how often the nurse presents information to them, and how much the nurse handles patients over the phone," she said. Having nurses involved from the beginning avoids future conflicts, and considering their thoughts on product selection and implementation will only help with workflow. "[The implementation] needs to be done with the support of staff; everyone needs to be involved," added Waldren.
4. Not participating in training: Don't undervalue the importance of training, since failure to provide and partake in it will only allow chaos to ensue come go-live time. Nelson said if a vendor suggests a nurse spend six hours on training and a doctor four, then do it. "Microsoft made us think everything is plug and play; the same with a MacBook," she said. "They think 'I can do the same thing with an EMR.' The difference is, it's a complicated environment with a lot of regulation, coding, and documentation. You have to dedicate the time for training."
5. Thinking you can implement the same processes as paper: Just as the EMR won't be a quick fix to problems in the practice, it will also require different processes than paper. "EMRs require process reengineering," said Waldren. The two ways of documenting data may seem similar, but they are based on considerably different workflows.
6. Not asking for extra help: A detrimental mistake Nelson often sees is groups thinking they can implement an EMR without asking for help. According to her, staff is already burdened with work. Thinking they can take on a conversion, along with learning a new product and dealing with a change in workflow, could lead to a disaster. "To do the whole thing without having extra people is just creating an opportunity to burn out staff or hamper your productivity," she said. "It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy because we're less productive, and we don't have nursing staff to support us." Nelson suggests bringing in temporary medical assistants to help during the transitional period.
7. Being short sighted: According to Waldren, it's important to find an EMR that supports not just the current healthcare industry, but what the industry will soon become. "You can't be shortsighted [when implementing an EMR]," he said. "It needs to measure quality improvements and populations, like those with diabetes, for example. It can't just measure today -- it has to measure tomorrow."
From failing to plan to skipping out on training, many mistakes can be made during the implementation process. And although they may not be as juicy as wrath, envy or lust, the Seven Deadly Sins of EMR implementation could wreak just as much havoc.
Steve Waldren, MD, director of the American Academy of Family Physicians' Center for Health IT, and Rosemarie Nelson, principal of the MGMA Consulting Group, gave us the worst sins providers can commit during EMR implementation.
1. Not doing your homework: Avoiding supplier problems means background research and thorough evaluations of vendors and products. And beware: vendors tend to make promises they can't keep. According to Waldren, it's important to get the specifics down on paper. "Often, a doctor will ask if [an EMR] can do this or that, and a vendor will say yes. Then, they're surprised when in reality, it doesn't. Doctors need to make sure all expectations are met in writing."
2. Assuming the EMR is a magic bullet: It's important to remember the EMR is a conversion, not an upgrade. Although the system will save you time and money in the long run, Waldren warns it isn't an instant fix to issues in the workplace. "Most people think an EMR solves problems," he said. "But an EMR will only amplify problems that already exist in the practice."
3. Not including nurses in the planning stages: Nelson says doctors tend to think a new EMR is all about them. "They don't think about how much the nurse preps the chart, how often the nurse presents information to them, and how much the nurse handles patients over the phone," she said. Having nurses involved from the beginning avoids future conflicts, and considering their thoughts on product selection and implementation will only help with workflow. "[The implementation] needs to be done with the support of staff; everyone needs to be involved," added Waldren.
4. Not participating in training: Don't undervalue the importance of training, since failure to provide and partake in it will only allow chaos to ensue come go-live time. Nelson said if a vendor suggests a nurse spend six hours on training and a doctor four, then do it. "Microsoft made us think everything is plug and play; the same with a MacBook," she said. "They think 'I can do the same thing with an EMR.' The difference is, it's a complicated environment with a lot of regulation, coding, and documentation. You have to dedicate the time for training."
5. Thinking you can implement the same processes as paper: Just as the EMR won't be a quick fix to problems in the practice, it will also require different processes than paper. "EMRs require process reengineering," said Waldren. The two ways of documenting data may seem similar, but they are based on considerably different workflows.
6. Not asking for extra help: A detrimental mistake Nelson often sees is groups thinking they can implement an EMR without asking for help. According to her, staff is already burdened with work. Thinking they can take on a conversion, along with learning a new product and dealing with a change in workflow, could lead to a disaster. "To do the whole thing without having extra people is just creating an opportunity to burn out staff or hamper your productivity," she said. "It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy because we're less productive, and we don't have nursing staff to support us." Nelson suggests bringing in temporary medical assistants to help during the transitional period.
7. Being short sighted: According to Waldren, it's important to find an EMR that supports not just the current healthcare industry, but what the industry will soon become. "You can't be shortsighted [when implementing an EMR]," he said. "It needs to measure quality improvements and populations, like those with diabetes, for example. It can't just measure today -- it has to measure tomorrow."
Links:
[1] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/top-5-worst-emr-myths
[2] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/5-keys-emr-usability
[1] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/top-5-worst-emr-myths
[2] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/5-keys-emr-usability
5 Keys to EMR Usability
Published on Healthcare IT News (http://www.healthcareitnews.com/)
5 keys to EMR usability
By Michelle McNickle, Web Content Producer
Created 09/06/2011
Usability: the concept is often at the root of slow adoption of EMR systems, and rightfully so. Although effective training and implementation methods affect user adoption rates as well, poor usability has a strong impact on productivity, error rate, and user satisfaction.
And usability should be considered more than just user satisfaction, according to Rosemarie Nelson, principal of the MGMA Consulting Group. The concept is far more complex, and to Nelson, it’s synonymous with workflow integration. “Too much attention is given to the number of clicks and screens, when what should be considered is how and when information is presented,” she said.
Dr. Steve Waldren, MD, Director of the American Academy of Family Physicians’ Center for Health IT, explained that when it comes to understanding usability, it’s essential to consider utility as well. “Usability is subjective in many ways,” he said. “It has to do with the functionality of the system. Utility is making sure the system does the things you need it to do.”
So what determines if an EMR is useable? Better yet, how can prospective users ensure a system won’t result in headaches over lost productivity? According to Nelson, the first step is to recognize no system is perfect.
“The problem for most providers is they, nor their vendor implementation team, look for that commonsense template: the one that fits a majority of patient visits, not the ‘perfect’ template that allows visits for all patients to be documented. There is just too much variation to expect 100 percent.”
With that in mind, here are five additional elements to consider when it comes to EMR usability.
Supportiveness: According to both Waldren and Nelson, the system should support workflow. “It’s not about a single user,” said Waldren. “It’s about an entire practice.” Waldren suggests presenting vendors with three clinical scenarios: the most common instances at a practice, the most challenging instances at a practice, and the most number of interactions among staff. That way, it’s evident how the system supports specific workflow. “I suggest doing two sets of the scenarios,” he said. “One that you present the vendor ahead of time, and the second during the demo. Then you can see the system’s flexibility to take care of each scenario.”
Flexibility: Nelson considers flexibility to be key, not just within the system, but also with those using it. “Usability is all about integrating a tool into a provider’s day,” she said. To illustrate, she suggests considering the evolution of the phone. “We started with one phone, then we add extensions,” she said. “Then, we came up with portable phones because our work is mobile. We found that we needed phones to follow us, not us having to go to the phone.” Since usability can become complicated, she said, the way a provider uses the tool might evolve as he/she becomes comfortable with improvements in workflow and operational efficiencies. Therefore, it’s essential to change how he/she interacts with the device and the software.
Ease of Learning/ Naturalness: Is the system burdensome and clunky? To be sure it isn’t, Nelson suggests providers take a close look at how they interact with their nurses when using the EMR in the demo. This goes for both patient encounters in the office and on the telephone, as well as incoming documentation, like test results and correspondence. “If it appears cumbersome or redundant, [physicians won’t] achieve the intended benefits because [they] just won’t use those features,” she said. “The best way to observe and understand the dance between nurse and provider is by taking a trip to see the EMR in operation at a practice.” Both the nurse and the provider should visit the site, said Nelson, to fully experience the change they’ll have to adapt to in their own office setting.
Effectiveness: Although an EMR’s effectiveness to streamline workflow is obvious when considering its usability, Waldren said providers should also consider the changes taking place in healthcare. “The current is based on volume: patients, procedures, etc.,” he said. “Patients aren’t connected. The future is value-based and consumer directed. Clinical data will be used to measure quality.” With that in mind, Waldren says it’s essential to find a system that will effectively straddle both worlds.
Efficiency: To Nelson, an EMR should save time, and even the smallest aspects of a system could mean wasted hours. However, some EMRs do a good job of allowing a nurse and a provider to easily work on the same computer station with fast log-out/log-in. “This keeps the active patient online to allow for the concurrent work of the provider and nurse. Even something as simple as keeping the electronic chart ‘open’ on the desktop can be a boon to workflow; a nurse or provider is often in one patient’s chart when a phone call interrupts their work, and they need to open another chart. But, of course, they don’t want to lose the one they are working on.”
One thing is for certain when it comes to EMRs and their usability: it’s an evolution that’s essentially controlled by the user. “EMR usability must evolve similarly in that as we try to use it within our day, we can see where improvements can be made,” said Nelson.
And usability should be considered more than just user satisfaction, according to Rosemarie Nelson, principal of the MGMA Consulting Group. The concept is far more complex, and to Nelson, it’s synonymous with workflow integration. “Too much attention is given to the number of clicks and screens, when what should be considered is how and when information is presented,” she said.
Dr. Steve Waldren, MD, Director of the American Academy of Family Physicians’ Center for Health IT, explained that when it comes to understanding usability, it’s essential to consider utility as well. “Usability is subjective in many ways,” he said. “It has to do with the functionality of the system. Utility is making sure the system does the things you need it to do.”
So what determines if an EMR is useable? Better yet, how can prospective users ensure a system won’t result in headaches over lost productivity? According to Nelson, the first step is to recognize no system is perfect.
“The problem for most providers is they, nor their vendor implementation team, look for that commonsense template: the one that fits a majority of patient visits, not the ‘perfect’ template that allows visits for all patients to be documented. There is just too much variation to expect 100 percent.”
With that in mind, here are five additional elements to consider when it comes to EMR usability.
Supportiveness: According to both Waldren and Nelson, the system should support workflow. “It’s not about a single user,” said Waldren. “It’s about an entire practice.” Waldren suggests presenting vendors with three clinical scenarios: the most common instances at a practice, the most challenging instances at a practice, and the most number of interactions among staff. That way, it’s evident how the system supports specific workflow. “I suggest doing two sets of the scenarios,” he said. “One that you present the vendor ahead of time, and the second during the demo. Then you can see the system’s flexibility to take care of each scenario.”
Flexibility: Nelson considers flexibility to be key, not just within the system, but also with those using it. “Usability is all about integrating a tool into a provider’s day,” she said. To illustrate, she suggests considering the evolution of the phone. “We started with one phone, then we add extensions,” she said. “Then, we came up with portable phones because our work is mobile. We found that we needed phones to follow us, not us having to go to the phone.” Since usability can become complicated, she said, the way a provider uses the tool might evolve as he/she becomes comfortable with improvements in workflow and operational efficiencies. Therefore, it’s essential to change how he/she interacts with the device and the software.
Ease of Learning/ Naturalness: Is the system burdensome and clunky? To be sure it isn’t, Nelson suggests providers take a close look at how they interact with their nurses when using the EMR in the demo. This goes for both patient encounters in the office and on the telephone, as well as incoming documentation, like test results and correspondence. “If it appears cumbersome or redundant, [physicians won’t] achieve the intended benefits because [they] just won’t use those features,” she said. “The best way to observe and understand the dance between nurse and provider is by taking a trip to see the EMR in operation at a practice.” Both the nurse and the provider should visit the site, said Nelson, to fully experience the change they’ll have to adapt to in their own office setting.
Effectiveness: Although an EMR’s effectiveness to streamline workflow is obvious when considering its usability, Waldren said providers should also consider the changes taking place in healthcare. “The current is based on volume: patients, procedures, etc.,” he said. “Patients aren’t connected. The future is value-based and consumer directed. Clinical data will be used to measure quality.” With that in mind, Waldren says it’s essential to find a system that will effectively straddle both worlds.
Efficiency: To Nelson, an EMR should save time, and even the smallest aspects of a system could mean wasted hours. However, some EMRs do a good job of allowing a nurse and a provider to easily work on the same computer station with fast log-out/log-in. “This keeps the active patient online to allow for the concurrent work of the provider and nurse. Even something as simple as keeping the electronic chart ‘open’ on the desktop can be a boon to workflow; a nurse or provider is often in one patient’s chart when a phone call interrupts their work, and they need to open another chart. But, of course, they don’t want to lose the one they are working on.”
One thing is for certain when it comes to EMRs and their usability: it’s an evolution that’s essentially controlled by the user. “EMR usability must evolve similarly in that as we try to use it within our day, we can see where improvements can be made,” said Nelson.
Links:
[1] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/usability-key-wide-emr-adoption
[1] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/usability-key-wide-emr-adoption
CMS Meaninful Use Stage 2 Requirements Current Direction and Timing
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have issued their latest direction and timing of the Meaningful Use Requirements for Stage 2 (approximate implementation date of 2014).
To view their updates, please go to: http://assets1.csc.com/health_services/downloads/CSC_Update_on_Stage_2_Current_Direction_and_Timing_of_MU_Requirements.pdf
We will help you in preparing for the implementation and set-up of your new Electronic Health Record (EHR) by:
*Assisting with the creation of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to the EHR company that YOU choose
*Assist with the Pricing and Negotiations for the EHR contract
*Perform a Network and Workflow Analysis of Your Practice to Improve Efficiency and Lower Costs
*Assist with the Set-up and Implementation of Hospital, Lab and Imaging Interfaces
*Provide Long-term IT Support for Your Network
Contact us today to discuss how we can make the transition from paper based charts to an EHR easier!!
Jennifer Sprague, CPC, CEHRS
EHR Consultant
jlsprague@msosolutions.com
315-484-8885
How to Successfully Navigate Your EHR Implementation
How to Successfully Navigate Your EHR Implementation
I'd read an article about this topic a couple years ago and i should to say it changed many things in my career . it's really a good clue for those who are interested in EHR implementation . the article is written by Dr. Kenneth G. Adler .
THE THREE T'S OF A SUCCESSFUL EHR IMPLEMENTATION
Team | Tactics | Technology |
|
|
|
Why the Medicaid EHR Incentive Program is a No-brainer
Published on Healthcare IT News (http://www.healthcareitnews.com/)
Why the Medicaid EHR incentive program is a no-brainer
By Molly Merrill, Associate Editor
Created 08/11/2011
ASHEVILLE, NC – Meaningful use expert Jim Tate has written that the Medicaid EHR incentive program reminds him of 'zero entry' swimming pools: very easy to get into, with almost no barriers. Given its less stringent requirements compared to the Medicare EHR incentive program, Tate writes, he's surprised that more eligible professionals are "not jumping into this incentive program with both feet."
Healthcare IT News asked Tate to expound on his blog post, which noted that the most attractive component of the Medicaid EHR program vs. the Medicare program was that to apply and receive the first year incentive EPs don’t have to be using an EHR. That's because EHR adoption is defined as having "acquired, purchased or secured access to certified EHR technology." In other words, says Tate, a signed contract means EPs are eligible to apply and attest their state Medicaid agency.
Q: Since you say the Medicaid incentive program is “the way to go,” why is it "easier" than the Medicare program and are there any other differences that you could highlight that providers may not be clear on?
A: The Medicaid incentive program is easier in that in an Eligible Provider's initial year they don't have to achieve meaningful use, as is required in the Medicare incentive program. In addition, there are no potential penalties and the incentives are not front-end loaded. To receive the maximum Medicare incentive an EP must begin in 2011 or 2012. In the Medicaid program they can wait as long as 2016 to enter the incentive program and still receive maximum incentives.
Q: What could be some of the reasons that Medicaid EP's may not be “jumping into this incentive program with both feet?” Could it be related to not enough patient volume to meet the quota, price of EHR, or could it simply be that providers are unaware?
A: I think many Medicaid EPs who meet the patient volume threshold simply do not know how low the bar is to receive first year incentives. The price of an EHR isn't an issue as the first year Medicaid incentives are $21,5000, more than enough to offset the cost of the technology.
Q: What was some of the feedback you received on this blog?
A: Many were surprised that under the Medicaid incentive program they could apply for the initial $21,500 incentive solely on the basis of a signed contract.
Q: What is the single most important advice you could give to providers about the Medicaid incentive program?
A: Go to CMS.gov and use the widget titled "Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs" to see if you qualify as an eligible Medicaid EP based on your patient volume.
Jim Tate is author of The Incentive Roadmap: The Meaningful Use of Certified Technology: Stage 1. He blogs at HITECHAnswers.
Healthcare IT News asked Tate to expound on his blog post, which noted that the most attractive component of the Medicaid EHR program vs. the Medicare program was that to apply and receive the first year incentive EPs don’t have to be using an EHR. That's because EHR adoption is defined as having "acquired, purchased or secured access to certified EHR technology." In other words, says Tate, a signed contract means EPs are eligible to apply and attest their state Medicaid agency.
Q: Since you say the Medicaid incentive program is “the way to go,” why is it "easier" than the Medicare program and are there any other differences that you could highlight that providers may not be clear on?
A: The Medicaid incentive program is easier in that in an Eligible Provider's initial year they don't have to achieve meaningful use, as is required in the Medicare incentive program. In addition, there are no potential penalties and the incentives are not front-end loaded. To receive the maximum Medicare incentive an EP must begin in 2011 or 2012. In the Medicaid program they can wait as long as 2016 to enter the incentive program and still receive maximum incentives.
Q: What could be some of the reasons that Medicaid EP's may not be “jumping into this incentive program with both feet?” Could it be related to not enough patient volume to meet the quota, price of EHR, or could it simply be that providers are unaware?
A: I think many Medicaid EPs who meet the patient volume threshold simply do not know how low the bar is to receive first year incentives. The price of an EHR isn't an issue as the first year Medicaid incentives are $21,5000, more than enough to offset the cost of the technology.
Q: What was some of the feedback you received on this blog?
A: Many were surprised that under the Medicaid incentive program they could apply for the initial $21,500 incentive solely on the basis of a signed contract.
Q: What is the single most important advice you could give to providers about the Medicaid incentive program?
A: Go to CMS.gov and use the widget titled "Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs" to see if you qualify as an eligible Medicaid EP based on your patient volume.
Jim Tate is author of The Incentive Roadmap: The Meaningful Use of Certified Technology: Stage 1. He blogs at HITECHAnswers.
Links:
[1] http://www.hitechanswers.net/medicaid-incentive-program-is-the-way-to-go/
[2] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/400m-ehr-incentives-delivered
[3] http://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/15_Eligibility.asp
[1] http://www.hitechanswers.net/medicaid-incentive-program-is-the-way-to-go/
[2] http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/400m-ehr-incentives-delivered
[3] http://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/15_Eligibility.asp
EHR Evaluation and Implementation Services
MSO Solution, LLC is a consulting group specializing in Healthcare IT and Electronic Health Record Consulting. It's our pleasure to assist health groups of all sizes increase efficiency, boost revenue, and provide better patient care through the use of EHR software. We will not recommend a particular EHR for your practice, but will assist you with:
-The creation of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to the EHR company you choose
-Pricing and Negotiations of the EHR contract
-Workflow Analysis of Your Practice to Improve Efficiency and Lower Costs
-Set-up and Implementation of Hospital, Lab and Imaging Interfaces
-Long-Term IT Support for Your Network
-24 Hour Emergency Support
Why choose MSO Solutions?
What sets us apart from others is our personalized service and tailored solutions. Our Network Administrator will work closely with you Practice to create a plan to ensure your network will meet the organization and EHR's future growth.
Please contact us today for a free initial consultation!
Phone:315-484-8885
Web: http://www.msosolutions.com/
-The creation of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to the EHR company you choose
-Pricing and Negotiations of the EHR contract
-Workflow Analysis of Your Practice to Improve Efficiency and Lower Costs
-Set-up and Implementation of Hospital, Lab and Imaging Interfaces
-Long-Term IT Support for Your Network
-24 Hour Emergency Support
Why choose MSO Solutions?
What sets us apart from others is our personalized service and tailored solutions. Our Network Administrator will work closely with you Practice to create a plan to ensure your network will meet the organization and EHR's future growth.
Please contact us today for a free initial consultation!
Phone:315-484-8885
Web: http://www.msosolutions.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)