HITSC Clinical Quality Workgroup Jim Walker March 27, 2012.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Meaningful Use and Health Information Exchange
Advertisements

Dedicated to Hope, Healing and Recovery 0 Dec 2009 Interim/Proposed Rules Meaningful Use, Quality Reporting & Interoperability Standards January 10, 2010.
2014 Edition Test Scenarios January Contents Purpose of Test Scenarios3 Completed Work4 Current Work5 Using a Narrative Test Case Scenario to Develop.
ELTSS Alignment to Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap DRAFT: For Stakeholder Consideration in response to public comment.
2014 Edition Release 2 EHR Certification Criteria Final Rule.
Recommendations on Certification of EHR Modules HIT Standards Committee Privacy and Security Workgroup April 11, 2014.
2014 Certification Criteria associated with MU Menu Stage 2: 2014 Certification Criteria associated with MU Core Stage 2: 2014 Certification Criteria associated.
HITSC: Health Information Technology “Summer Camp” Doug Fridsma
Summary of Comments on the ONC Voluntary 2015 Edition Proposed Rule Implementation Workgroup Liz Johnson, co-chair Cris Ross, co-chair April 24, 2014.
S&I Framework Laboratory Initiatives Update June 6, 2013.
Clinical Quality Workgroup April 24, 2014 Comments on the ONC Voluntary 2015 Edition Proposed Rule Marjorie Rallins– co-chair Danny Rosenthal –co-chair.
Meeting Stage 1 Meaningful Use Criterion Carlos A. Leyva, Esq. Digital Business Law Group, P.A.
2015 Edition Proposed Rule Modifications to the ONC Health IT Certification Program and 2015 Edition Health IT Certification Criteria.
Interoperability and Health Information Exchange Workgroup April 17, 2015 Micky Tripathi, chair Chris Lehmann, co-chair.
Proposed Meaningful Use Criteria for Stage 2 and 3 John D. Halamka.
The Standards Rule and the NPRM for Meaningful Use John D. Halamka MD.
Larry Wolf, chair Marc Probst, co-chair Certification / Adoption Workgroup January 21, 2014.
Series 1: Meaningful Use for Behavioral Health Providers From the CIHS Video Series “Ten Minutes at a Time” Module 2: The Role of the Certified Complete.
Discussion of 2015 Ed. NPRM Certification/Adoption Workgroup HIT Policy Committee April 2, 2014.
August 12, Meaningful Use *** UDOH Informatics Brown Bag Robert T Rolfs, MD, MPH.
Meaningful Use Stage 2 Esthee Van Staden September 2014.
Meaningful Use Measures. Reporting Time Periods Reporting Period for 1 st year of MU (Stage 1) 90 consecutive days within the calendar year Reporting.
Series 1: Meaningful Use for Behavioral Health Providers From the CIHS Video Series “Ten Minutes at a Time” Module 2: The Role of the Certified Complete.
Medicaid EHR Incentive Program For Eligible Professionals Overview of the Proposed 2015 Modification Rule Kim Davis-Allen Outreach Coordinator
1101 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington, DC :00 pm ET, March 7, (773)
Affordable Healthcare IT Solutions. MU RX Compliance with Meaningful Use Stage 2.
Query Health Operations Workgroup HQMF & QRDA Query Format - Results Format February 9, :00am – 12:00am ET.
MODULE B: Case Report Forms Jane Fendl & Denise Thwing April 7, Version: Final 07-Apr-2010.
Standards Analysis Summary vMR – Pros Designed for computability Compact Wire Format Aligned with HeD Efforts – Cons Limited Vendor Adoption thus far Represents.
Page 0 10/19/201510/19/2015 Meaningful Use of Health IT: Laboratory Data Capturing and Reporting Nikolay Lipskiy, MD, DrPH, MBA CDC, PHITPO.
Component 11: Configuring EHRs Unit 2: Meaningful Use of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) Lecture 1 This material was developed by Oregon Health & Science.
Larry Wolf, chair Marc Probst, co-chair Certification / Adoption Workgroup February 21, 2014.
HIT Policy Committee Adoption/Certification Workgroup Comments on NPRM, IFR Paul Egerman, Co-Chair Retired Marc Probst, Co-Chair Intermountain Healthcare.
Workgroup Clinical Quality Measure Workgroup Jim Walker & Karen Kmetik, Co-Chairs May 7, :30 pm – 5:30 pm.
Provider Data Migration and Patient Portability NwHIN Power Team August 28, /28/141.
Understanding eMeasures – And Their Impact on the EHR June 3, 2014 Linda Hyde, RHIA.
©2011 Falcon, LLC. All rights reserved. Proprietary. May not be copied or distributed without the express written permission of Falcon, LLC. Falcon EHR.
June 18, 2010 Marty Larson.  Health Information Exchange  Meaningful Use Objectives  Conclusion.
Larry Wolf, chair Marc Probst, co-chair Certification / Adoption Workgroup March 6, 2014.
Health IT Workforce Curriculum Version 1.0 Fall Networking and Health Information Exchange Unit 3b National and International Standards Developing.
Larry Wolf Certification / Adoption Workgroup May 13th, 2014.
Health eDecisions Use Case 2: CDS Guidance Service Strawman of Core Concepts Use Case 2 1.
Component 11/Unit 2a Meaningful Use of the Electronic Health Record (EHR)
Ongoing/Planned Activities for Week of 4/29 Final UCR Crosswalk due COB 4/30 Hold two working sessions to complete UCR Crosswalk on 4/30 Hold working session.
Networking and Health Information Exchange Unit 7c Supporting Standards for EHR Application.
Clinical Quality Workgroup Update Jim Walker MD, Chair July 25, 2012 Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.
HIT Standards Committee Overview and Progress Report March 17, 2010.
HIT Standards Committee Clinical Operations Workgroup Jamie Ferguson Kaiser Permanente John Halamka Harvard University February 24, 2010.
CMS Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs Final Rule Overview 1 Robert Anthony.
Ongoing/Planned Activities for Week of 4/22 Initial feedback on UCR Crosswalk due COB 4/23 Hold working session to continue filling out the UCR Crosswalk.
Ongoing/Planned Activities for Week of 4/29 Final UCR Crosswalk due COB 4/30 Hold two working sessions to complete UCR Crosswalk on 4/30 Hold working session.
Use Case 2 – CDS Guidance Service Transactions CDS Guidance Requestor 2. CDS Response (Clinical Data, Supporting Evidence, Supporting Reference, Actions,
HITPC Meaningful Use Stage 3 RFC Comments July 22, 2013 Information Exchange Workgroup Micky Tripathi.
Configuring axiUm for Meaningful Use
Clinical Quality Workgroup April 10, 2014 Commenting on the ONC Voluntary 2015 Edition Proposed Rule Marjorie Rallins– co-chair Danny Rosenthal –co-chair.
Health IT Standards Committee A Public Advisory Body on Health Information Technology to the National Coordinator for Health IT 2017 Interoperability Standards.
2014 Edition Test Scenarios Development Overview Presenter: Scott Purnell-Saunders, ONC November 12, 2013 DRAFT.
Structured Data Capture (SDC) FHIR SDC Pilots Template
1 The information contained in this presentation is based on proposed and working documents. Health Information Exchange Interoperability Minnesota Department.
Structured Data Capture (SDC)
Overview of Request for Comments ONC 2017 Interoperability Standards Advisory ONC looking for comments on any last revisions, additions, or recommendations.
Component 11/Unit 7 Implementing Clinical Decision Support
Electronic Health Information Systems
Structured Data Capture (SDC)
EHR System Function and Information Model (EHR-S FIM is based on EHR-S FM R2.0) CP.1.2 Manage Allergy, Intolerance and Adverse Reaction List aka DC
Health Information Exchange Interoperability
Special Topics in Vendor-Specific Systems
Module 4 Part 3 Operationalizing the Measures
Component 11 Unit 7: Building Order Sets
Presentation transcript:

HITSC Clinical Quality Workgroup Jim Walker March 27, 2012

NPRM Comments reviewed * Clinical Decision Support Clinical Information Reconciliation Quality measures Problem List * We selected these as they are most relevant to the scope of our workgroup

Feedback: Standards & Certification Criteria NPRM Tiger Team Kickoff this week –Quality Measure Essential Components Tiger Team This Tiger Team will focus on identifying essential components of high quality clinical quality measures. This includes (but is not limited to) discussion of value sets, standard terminologies, and the technical & custodial requirements for creation, sharing and maintenance of these components. –Characteristics of Optimal Clinical Quality Measures for Health IT Tiger Team. This Tiger Team will focus on identifying the attributes of optimal clinical quality measures that are created or “re-tooled” for use in Health IT. This includes (but not limited to) discussion of the scope of quality measure data element expectations, the Quality Data Model, EHR workflow considerations, and links to care quality improvement processes.

NPRM Feedback

Clinical Quality Measures Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 40 StandardsWG Comments § (c)(1)-(3) 1. Clinical quality measures – capture and export. (i) Capture. Electronically record all of the data elements that are represented in the standard specified in § (c). (ii) Export. Electronically export a data file that includes all of the data elements that are represented in the standard specified in § (c). 2. Clinical quality measures – incorporate and calculate. (i) Incorporate. Electronically incorporate all of the data elements necessary to calculate each of the clinical quality measures included in the EHR technology. (ii) Calculate. Electronically calculate each clinical quality measure that is included in the EHR technology. 3. Clinical quality measures – reporting. Enable a user to electronically create for transmission clinical quality measurement results in a data file defined by CMS. § (c) (NQF Quality Data Model) Standards: Recommend use of a constrained NQF QDM that only includes reference to data that should be included in EHRs. C1i – Quality measures should have the ability to use patient-submitted data, which is not typically captured in EHRs. C1ii – Use existing PQRS XML format since QRDA format is not yet an available standard. C1ii – Want to verify that data can be exported to another module outside the EHR for 3 rd party analysis, & then submitted from that module to CMS. C3 – Unable to comment on TBD items, e.g. “in a data file defined by CMS” – as no standard is referenced. C3 – Needs clarification. Does this mean report of patient level data, or aggregate data? Question: What is the difference between 1ii “export” and 3 “report?

Clinical Decision Support Interventions Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 6 StandardsWG Comments § (a)(8) / § (a)(2) Clinical decision support. (i)Evidence-based decision support interventions. Enable a user to select (or activate) one or more electronic clinical decision support interventions (in addition to drug-drug and drug-allergy contraindication checking) based on the data elements included in each one or any combination of the following: Problem list; Medication list; Medication allergy list; Demographics; Laboratory tests and values/results; and Vital signs. § (b)(1) (HL7 Context- Aware Knowledge Retrieval (“Infobutton”) Standard, International Normative Edition 2010 Clarify “in each one or any combination of the following.” Because vaccinations are not typically included in the medication list, and because they are not called out, one could interpret this to mean that CDS for vaccinations is excluded. Suggest “one or any combination of..” and suggest calling out vaccinations as a separate item. Is this a broad list of things that can be included CDS, or that must ? In other words, is there a minimum “bar”? Medication allergies are specified, but there are other allergies such as latex and peanut allergies that would change planned clinical treatment. Suggest including “medication and other allergies”

Referential Clinical Decision Support Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 6, cont. StandardsWG Comments Clinical decision support. (ii) Linked referential clinical decision support. (A) Enable a user to retrieve diagnostic or therapeutic reference information in accordance with the standard specified at § (b)(1). (B) Enable a user to access the reference information specified in paragraph (ii)(A) relevant to patient context based on the data elements included in each one or any combination of the following: Problem list; Medication list; Medication allergy list; Demographics; Laboratory tests and values/results; and Vital signs. § (b)(1) (HL7 Context- Aware Knowledge Retrieval (“Infobutton”) Standard, International Normative Edition 2010 B - Clarify “in each one or any combination of the following” If the intent is for inclusion of one or more, suggest limiting the list to things of highest value. For example, demographics and vital signs may be used as filtering criteria, but are likely not a starting point for referential CDS. Question: Suggest being more specific about the types of things that are included. Are things like smoking, suicide risk, and falls in the elderly included? The Infobutton Implementation Guide should be included in the standard reference – not just the normative standard: URL-based Implementations of the Context-Aware Information Retrieval (Infobutton) Domain; Infobutton Request, Release 3 (Jan 2010)

Clinical Decision Support Configuration Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 6, cont. StandardsWG Comments Clinical decision support. (iii) Configure clinical decision support. (A) Enable interventions and reference resources specified in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) and (ii) to be configured by an identified set of users (e.g., system administrator) based on each one of the following: (1) A user’s role; (2) Clinical setting; and (3) Identified points in the clinical workflow. (B) Enable interventions to be triggered, based on the data elements specified in paragraph (a)(8)(i), when a summary care record is incorporated pursuant to § (b)(1). (vi) Automatically and electronically interact. Interventions selected and configured in accordance with paragraphs (a)(8)(i)-(iii) must automatically and electronically occur when a user is interacting with EHR technology. § (b)(1) (HL7 Context- Aware Knowledge Retrieval (“Infobutton”) Standard, International Normative Edition 2010 iiiA3 – Suggest defining clinical work flow, or broadening to “care process”. There are many actors who all have a part to play in clinical workflow. iiiB – Suggest clarifying “data elements” Typographical comment: vi should be iv (4) in this list Use of the word “electronic” in iv seems superfluous

Clinical Decision Support Configuration (cont’d) Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 6, cont. StandardsWG Comments Clinical decision support. (iii) Configure clinical decision support. (A) Enable interventions and reference resources specified in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) and (ii) to be configured by an identified set of users (e.g., system administrator) based on each one of the following: (1) A user’s role; (2) Clinical setting; and (3) Identified points in the clinical workflow. (B) Enable interventions to be triggered, based on the data elements specified in paragraph (a)(8)(i), when a summary care record is incorporated pursuant to § (b)(1). (vi) Automatically and electronically interact. Interventions selected and configured in accordance with paragraphs (a)(8)(i)-(iii) must automatically and electronically occur when a user is interacting with EHR technology. § (b)(1) (HL7 Context- Aware Knowledge Retrieval (“Infobutton”) Standard, International Normative Edition 2010 iiiA3 – Suggest defining clinical work flow, or broadening to “care process”. There are many actors who all have a part to play in clinical workflow. iiiB – Suggest clarifying “data elements”

Clinical Decision Support Metadata Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 6, cont. StandardsWG Comments Clinical decision support. (v) Source attributes. Enable a user to review the attributes for each intervention or reference source for all clinical decision support resources including: (A) Bibliographic citation (clinical research/guideline) including publication; (B) Developer of the intervention (translation from clinical research/guideline); (C) Funding source of the intervention development technical implementation; and (D) Release and, if applicable, revision date of the intervention. Drug-drug, drug-allergy interaction checks (i) Interventions. Before a medication order is placed during computerized provider order entry (CPOE), interventions must automatically and electronically indicate to a user at the point of care of drug-drug and drug-allergy contraindications based on medication list and medication allergy list. § (b)(1) (HL7 Context- Aware Knowledge Retrieval (“Infobutton”) Standard, International Normative Edition 2010 No comments

Clinical Information Reconciliation Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 15 StandardsWG Comments § (b)(4) Clinical information reconciliation. Enable a user to electronically reconcile the data elements that represent a patient’s active medication, problem, and medication allergy list as follows. For each list type: (i) Electronically display the data elements from two or more sources in a manner that allows a user to view the data elements and their attributes, which must include, at a minimum, the source and last modification date. (ii) Enable a user to merge and remove individual data elements. (iii) Enable a user to review and validate the accuracy of a final set of data elements and, upon a user’s confirmation, automatically update the list. Ability to perform actions should be based on role, as in “configure CDS” in Item 6. Suggest including “other allergies” in addition to medication allergies.

Problem List Proposed 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria: Item 43 StandardsWG Comments § (a)(5) Problem list. Enable a user to electronically record, change, and access a patient’s problem list for longitudinal care in accordance with, at a minimum, the version of the standard specified in § (a)(3). § (a)(3) (SNOMED CT® International Release January 2012) Suggest clarifying the phrase “in accordance with, at a minimum, the version of the standard…” Suggest defining the term longitudinal, as this term can be interpreted in different ways, e.g. longitudinal over all care in a life span, longitudinal over care from a single provider, etc. Regarding SNOMED CT – Need clarification regarding whether this means all data must be recorded in SNOMED CT (suggest this is too prescriptive), stored as SNOMED CT or represented as SNOMED CT. Also need to clarify whether the end user must see the SNOMED CT representation of data collected, as this is invisible to the user in many cases.