Stage 3 Update Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup January 28, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Meaningful Use and Health Information Exchange
Advertisements

Longitudinal Coordination of Care LTPAC SWG Monday August 5, 2013.
Quality Measures Vendor Tiger Team January 30, 2014.
ELTSS Alignment to Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap DRAFT: For Stakeholder Consideration in response to public comment.
Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG)
Understanding Meaningful Use Presented by: Allison Bryan MS, CHES December 7, 2012 Purdue Research Foundation 2012 Review of Stage 1 and Stage 2.
DRAFT Stage 3 Update Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup August 16, 2013.
HITPC - Information Exchange Work Group Meaningful Use Stage 3 Subgroup 2: Care Coordination and Patient and Family Engagement Co-Chairs: Jeff Donnell.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Stage 3 Recommendations Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Chair George Hripcsak, Columbia University, Co-Chair.
Meeting Stage 1 Meaningful Use Criterion Carlos A. Leyva, Esq. Digital Business Law Group, P.A.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 4 – Population and Public Health May 13, 2013 Art Davidson, subgroup chair George Hripcsack, MU WG co-chair.
TWS July2011 Stimulation Part 2. TWS July 2011 Objective: Implement drug formulary checks. Measure: The EP has enabled this functionality and has access.
GOVERNMENT EHR FUNDING: MEANINGFUL USE STAGE 2 UPDATE October 25, 2012 Jonathan Krasner Healthcare IT Consultant BEI
Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup December 2, 2013.
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.
A Primer on Healthcare Information Exchange John D. Halamka MD CIO, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs
August 12, Meaningful Use *** UDOH Informatics Brown Bag Robert T Rolfs, MD, MPH.
Stage 3 Draft Recommendations Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup February 4, 2014.
A First Look at Meaningful Use Stage 2 John D. Halamka MD.
Meaningful Use Stage 2 Esthee Van Staden September 2014.
HIT Policy Committee Accountable Care Workgroup – Kickoff Meeting May 17, :00 – 2:00 PM Eastern.
Meaningful Use Measures. Reporting Time Periods Reporting Period for 1 st year of MU (Stage 1) 90 consecutive days within the calendar year Reporting.
New Opportunity for Network Value: Using Health IT to Improve Transitions of Care 600 East Superior Street, Suite 404 I Duluth, MN I Ph
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.
Stage 3 Update Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup January 16, 2014.
Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup April 10, 2014.
DRAFT Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup October 28, 2013.
INFLUENCE OF MEANINGFUL USE AMONG HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS Neely Duffey, Olivia Mire, Mallory Murphy, and Dana Sizemore.
NWH TRANSITION OF CARE DOCUMENT FOR MU STAGE 2 JUNE 6, 2014.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 2 - Engaging Patients and Families June 17, 2013 Christine Bechtel, Subgroup Chair Paul Tang, MU WG Chair 1.
A First Look at Meaningful Use Stage 2 John D. Halamka MD.
Overview of Interoperability Standards Advisory Steve Posnack Director of Office of Standards and Technology, ONC 1.
Stage 3 Draft Recommendations Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup February 11, 2014.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 4 – Population and Public Health June 12, 2013 Art Davidson, subgroup chair George Hripcsak, MU WG co-chair.
Medicaid EHR Incentive Program For Eligible Professionals Overview of the Proposed 2015 Modification Rule Kim Davis-Allen Outreach Coordinator
Affordable Healthcare IT Solutions. MU RX Compliance with Meaningful Use Stage 2.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 4 – Population and Public Health May 1, 2013 Art Davidson, subgroup chair George Hripcsack, MU WG co-chair.
Stage 3 Draft Recommendations Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup March 11, 2014.
Stage 2 Eligible Hospital and Critical Access Hospital (CAH) Meaningful Use Core and Menu Objectives.
HIT Policy Committee: Meaningful Use Workgroup Stage 3 – Preliminary Recommendations Debrief Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Chair George Hripcsak,
Data Intermediaries and Meaningful Use: Quality Measure Innovation, Calculation and Reporting Recommendations from Data Intermediary Tiger Team.
Stage 3 Draft Recommendations Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup March 18, 2014.
Unit 1b: Health Care Quality and Meaningful Use Introduction to QI and HIT This material was developed by Johns Hopkins University, funded by the Department.
1 Meaningful Use Stage 2 The Value of Performance Benchmarking.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Population and Public Health – Subgroup 4 Art Davidson, Chair September 11, 2012.
HITPC – Meaningful Use Workgroup Care Coordination – Subgroup 3 Stage 3 Planning July 27, 2012.
DRAFT Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup October 24, 2013.
HIT Policy Committee Adoption/Certification Workgroup Comments on NPRM, IFR Paul Egerman, Co-Chair Retired Marc Probst, Co-Chair Intermountain Healthcare.
June 18, 2010 Marty Larson.  Health Information Exchange  Meaningful Use Objectives  Conclusion.
Larry Wolf Certification / Adoption Workgroup May 13th, 2014.
Christopher H. Tashjian, MD, FAAFP July 23, 2013, Washington D.C.
Meaningful Use: Stage 2 Changes An overall simplification of the program aligned to the overarching goals of sustainability as discussed in the Stage.
CMS Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs Final Rule Overview 1 Robert Anthony.
HITPC - Information Exchange Work Group Meaningful Use Stage 3 Subgroup 2: Care Coordination and Patient and Family Engagement Co-Chairs: Jeff Donnell.
Stage 3 Draft Recommendations Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup March 11, 2014.
HITPC Meaningful Use Stage 3 RFC Comments July 22, 2013 Information Exchange Workgroup Micky Tripathi.
Meaningful Use Workgroup June 24, 2013 Paul Tang, chair George Hripcsak, co-chair 1.
HITPC – Information Exchange Workgroup Care Coordination Discussions Stage 3 Planning July 25, 2012.
HITPC – Information Exchange Workgroup Care Coordination Discussions Stage 3 Planning July 26, 2012.
Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 2 - Engaging Patients and Families Christine Bechtel, Subgroup Chair Paul Tang, MU WG Chair July 2,
© 2015 Health Level Seven ® International. All Rights Reserved. HL7 and Health Level Seven are registered trademarks of Health Level Seven International.
David W. Bates, MD, MSc Chief Quality Officer, Brigham and Women’s Hospital Member, HIT Policy Committee President-elect, ISQua Medinfo, 2013.
Bronx Health Access: IT Requirements Gathering IT REQUIREMENTS GATHERING 1.
Clinical Documentation Hearing Recommendations Meaningful Use and Certification and Adoption Workgroups Paul Tang, MU Workgroup Chair Larry Wolf, C&A Workgroup.
Health IT Policy Committee Workgroup Evolution
2017 Modified Stage 2 Meaningful Use Objectives Overview Massachusetts Medicaid EHR Incentive Program September 19 & 20, 2017 September 19,
Health Information Exchange for Eligible Clinicians 2019
Presentation transcript:

Stage 3 Update Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup January 28, 2014

Workplan DateMeeting Tasks 1/28/14 1:00-3:00 ET PGHD follow-up discussion Review of care coordination & population/public health priorities 2/4/14 Present to recommendations to the HITPC 2/11/14 10:00-12:00 ET Review feedback from HITPC Discuss 2014 workplan 2/19/14 10:00-12:00 ET Possibly cancel? 3/3/14 10:00-12:00 ET MU3 Listening session 3/18/14 10:00-12:00 ET Review feedback from listening session Hearing planning 1

Patient Generated Health Data Recommendations John Halamka, HITSC vice chair Leslie Kelly Hall, HITSC Consumer Technology WG, chair 2

Engaging patients and families in their care: Patient Generated Health Data 3 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals *New* Menu: Eligible Professionals and Eligible Hospitals accept provider-requested electronically submitted patient-generated health information through structured or semi-structured questionnaires (e.g., screening questionnaires, medication adherence surveys, intake forms, risk assessment, functional status) or secure messaging. Although not a part of the certification criteria, if an organization’s EHR accepts patient-generated information using interfaces to remote devices, such data will count as patient-generated health information. Threshold: Low Stage 3 Functionality Goals Enabling active participation by patients and families to improve health and care Provide ability to contribute information in the record, including patient reported outcomes (PRO) Patient preferences recorded and used

PGHD Recommendations Consumer Technology and Clinical Ops WG (I) Overarching recommendations – Concern regarding certification only items, as systems must be engineered to incorporate standards/processes which may not yet be mature – Standards application should be constrained to where they are needed and useful 4

PGHD Recommendations Consumer Technology and Clinical Ops WG (II) Where there is a need for patient data sharing, the C-CDA is suitable. C- CDA is recommended as a container for certain types of templates that are well understood (e.g. problems, meds, allergies). – C-CDA over existing (Direct, Exchange) and other modes of transport are reasonable ways to get data in and out of EHRs, PHRs, and patient facing applications – C-CDA should not be required as the architecture that organizations (e.g. ACOs) have to use. The outcome goal is for the entire care team (patient/families/providers) to be able to contribute to an integrated medical record – If unable to integrate, systems must have the functionality to receive C-CDA containing specific templates (e.g. to accomplish the same goal of patients participating in problems, med, and allergy reconciliation) – Need to allow for innovation and flexibility in this space to not unduly constrain options for individuals to connect with their care teams in the ways they prefer in the future. Suggest using the C-CDA template payloads that are sufficiently mature, but not over- specify how they are to be moved about 5

PGHD - Devices Need to allow for innovation, as the marketplace is still rapidly evolving – Continua standards are directionally appropriate, but need to align with FDA guidance and other regulatory or sub-regulatory policy without constraining the marketplace – Due to the immaturity of the market, need to allow for the flexible adoption of device data and other remote data source 6

Improving care coordination: Stage 3 Priorities 7 Stage 3 Functional Objectives Medication reconciliation Summary of care for transfers of care Summary of care for consult requests and reports Notifications MU Outcome Goals All members of a patient’s care team (including professional healthcare team, patient, and caregivers), as authorized, participate in implementing coordinated care plan Stage Functional Objectives Medication reconciliation Summary of care for transfers of care Red: Changes to objective Blue: Newly introduced Stage 3 Functionality Goals Relevant patient information is shared among health care team and patient, especially during transitions (site or provider) Care plan components such as health concerns, goals, interventions and care team members are shared and tracked

Improving care coordination : Medication reconciliation 8 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals Core: Eligible Professionals, Hospitals, and CAHs who receive patients from another setting of care perform medication reconciliation. Threshold: No Change FAQ: Reconciliation may also be performed for all encounters Stage 3 Functionality Goals Relevant patient information is shared among health care team and patient, especially during transitions (site or provider) Care plan components such as health concerns, goals, interventions and care team members are shared and tracked

Improving care coordination: Summary of care for transfers of care 9 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals Eligible Professionals/Eligible Hospitals/Critical Access Hospitals provide a summary of care* record during transfers of care from one site of care to another (e.g., Hospital to SNF, PCP, HHA, home, etc…; SNF, PCP, etc… to HHA; PCP to new PCP) Summary of care may (at the discretion of the provider organization) include: – A narrative that includes a synopsis of current care and expectations for consult/transition – Overarching patient goals and/or problem specific goals – Patient instructions, suggested interventions for care during transition – Information about known care team members (including a designated caregiver) Threshold: No Change Stage 3 Functionality Goals Relevant patient information is shared among health care team and patient, especially during transitions (site or provider) Care plan components such as health concerns, goals, interventions and care team members are shared and tracked

Improving care coordination: Summary of care for consult requests and reports 10 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals *NEW* (Related to order tracking objective for tests, images, and consult requests (referrals)) Menu: Eligible Professionals/Eligible Hospitals and CAH provide a summary of care* record that pertains to the type of care transition as indicted below: Types of transitions: – Consult (referral) request (e.g., PCP to Specialist; PCP, SNF, ED, public health etc.) – Consult result note (e.g. ER note, consult note) Summary of care may (at the discretion of the provider organization) include: – A narrative that includes a synopsis of current care and expectations for consult/transition – Overarching patient goals and/or problem specific goals – Patient instructions, suggested interventions for care during transition – Information about known care team members (including a designated caregiver) Threshold: Low *An electronic summary is preferred Stage 3 Functionality Goals Relevant patient information is shared among health care team and patient, especially during transitions (site or provider) Care plan components such as health concerns, goals, interventions and care team members are shared and tracked

Improving care coordination: Notifications 11 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals *NEW* Menu: Eligible Hospitals and CAHs send electronic notifications of significant healthcare events in a timely manner to key members of the patient’s care team (e.g., the primary care provider, referring provider, or care coordinator) with the patient’s consent if required Significant events include: – Arrival at an Emergency Department (ED) – Admission to a hospital – Discharge from an ED or hospital – Death Notifications should be automatically sent to the provider of record Low threshold Modular certification is encouraged, this does not need to be an EHR function Stage 3 Functionality Goals Relevant patient information is shared among health care team and patient, especially during transitions (site or provider) Care plan components such as health concerns, goals, interventions and care team members are shared and tracked

Improving population and public health: Stage 3 Priorities 12 Stage 3 Functional Objectives Case reports Registries Sharing immunization data Electronic lab reporting Submission of electronic syndromic surveillance data MU Outcome Goals Providers know the health status of their patient population Public health officials know the health status of their jurisdiction Providers and specialty societies can track and manage domain specific events related to practice and devices Providers and public health officials share information to improve individual and population health Stage Functional Objectives Patient lists Sharing immunization data Cancer and specialty registry Electronic lab reporting Submission of electronic syndromic surveillance data Red: Changes to objective Blue: Newly introduced Stage 3 Functionality Goals Efficient and timely completion of case reports Efficient and timely means of defining and reporting on patient populations to drive clinical care and identify areas for improvement Shared information with public health agencies or specialty societies Bidirectional public health data exchange

Improving population and public health: Case Reports 13 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals *NEW* Certification criteria CEHRT is capable of using external knowledge (i.e., CDC/CSTE Reportable Conditions Knowledge Management System) to prompt an end-user when criteria are met for case reporting. When case reporting criteria are met, CEHRT is capable of recording and maintaining an audit for the date and time of prompt. CEHRT is capable of using external knowledge to collect standardized case reports (e.g., structured data capture) and preparing a standardized case report (e.g., consolidated CDA) that may be submitted to the state/local jurisdiction and the data/time of submission is available for audit. Stage 3 Functionality Goals Efficient and timely completion of case reports Efficient and timely means of defining and reporting on patient populations to drive clinical care and identify areas for improvement Shared information with public health agencies or specialty societies Bidirectional public health data exchange

Improving population and public health: Registries 14 Functionality Needed to Achieve Goals EPs/EHs reuse CEHRT data to electronically submit standardized (i.e., data elements, structure and transport mechanisms) reports to two registries (e.g., local/state health departments, professional or other aggregating resources) Reporting should use one (or more) of these mechanisms: – For uploading information on individual cases to registries, use standard or enhanced (e.g., structured data capture) c-CDA (e.g., early hearing detection and intervention, cancer, or healthcare associated infections), – For large-scale (population-wide) reporting of common conditions, use a modified consolidated CDA to limit protected health information release to community-based, high priority condition registries (e.g., obesity or hypertension), or – Leverage national networks (e.g., FDA Mini-sentinel or DARTNet Institute) or local (e.g., NYC Primary Care Information Project) federated query technologies. CEHRT is capable (certification criteria only) of allowing end-user to configure standard c-CDA file to determine which data will be sent to the high priority condition registries (#2 mechanism above). Registry owners (e.g., health department, professional societies, other aggregating resources) provide participation proof (e.g., letter) Stage 3 Functionality Goals Efficient and timely completion of case reports Efficient and timely means of defining and reporting on patient populations to drive clinical care and identify areas for improvement Shared information with public health agencies or specialty societies Bidirectional public health data exchange