1. Comprehensive Review of Quality Measurement and Reporting Brief Profile Proposal for 2011/12 presented to the Quality, Research & Public Health (QRPH) Planning Committee Gora Datta Delane Heldt Audrey Dickerson, RN, MS October 6, 2011

2. Quality, Research & Public Health (QRPH) Planning Committee The Problem Currently there are HIT standards, within the health quality domain that may not align with the Meaningful Use requirements for quality measurement and reportingCurrently there are HIT standards, within the health quality domain that may not align with the Meaningful Use requirements for quality measurement and reporting There has been feedback by the quality stakeholder community that gaps in the standards increase the burden on implementers integrating quality measures within their systemsThere has been feedback by the quality stakeholder community that gaps in the standards increase the burden on implementers integrating quality measures within their systems A standards gap analysis will provide an in-depth view of the standards and outline the lack of continuity and interoperability currently inhibiting quality measure implementationA standards gap analysis will provide an in-depth view of the standards and outline the lack of continuity and interoperability currently inhibiting quality measure implementation

3. Quality, Research & Public Health (QRPH) Planning Committee Use Case Quality measures are written based on clinical evidence and then specified for use with electronic data (eSpecifications) using NQFs Quality Data Model (QDM). e- Specifications include both logic and coding in value setsQuality measures are written based on clinical evidence and then specified for use with electronic data (eSpecifications) using NQFs Quality Data Model (QDM). e- Specifications include both logic and coding in value sets eSpecifications are then used as the base requirements for generating a HQMF documenteSpecifications are then used as the base requirements for generating a HQMF document Implementers then use the measure, eSpecifications and HQMF for implementation that includes the extracting and quality data subset, calculation and reportingImplementers then use the measure, eSpecifications and HQMF for implementation that includes the extracting and quality data subset, calculation and reporting For Meaningful Use Stage I PQRI XML was used and attestation was required.For Meaningful Use Stage I PQRI XML was used and attestation was required.

4. Quality, Research & Public Health (QRPH) Planning Committee Proposed Standards & Systems HL7--EHR-FM, HQMF, V3 Documents (CDA), QRDAHL7--EHR-FM, HQMF, V3 Documents (CDA), QRDA NQF- QDMNQF- QDM PRQI XML- Reporting Standard named in Stage I Use of Terminology and Vocabularies named in the MU EHR Functional Model CCR and CCD as data for data exchange HITSP Quality work

5. Quality, Research & Public Health (QRPH) Planning Committee Discussion The level of effort will be medium to large, there are multiple standard that need to be addressed and a complex workflow that will need to be analyzedThe level of effort will be medium to large, there are multiple standard that need to be addressed and a complex workflow that will need to be analyzed Editorial Leads:Editorial Leads: –Gora Datta, CAL2CAL Corporation, gora@cal2cal.com –Delane Heldt, AMA-PCPI, delane.heldt@ama-assn.org This groups should be comprised with a multi-stakeholder group with subject matter experts that range from clinical and technical resources as well as experts in clinical quality measurement for both hospitals and eligible professionalsThis groups should be comprised with a multi-stakeholder group with subject matter experts that range from clinical and technical resources as well as experts in clinical quality measurement for both hospitals and eligible professionals