In what ways does it make sense to extend Direct Project beyond those already defined by Meaningful Use?
Meaningful Use is the new standard in healthcare, driven by the passage of HITECH.
Engaged patients have better outcomes and cost less to care for. How do we get patients who are not engaged to become more participatory?
Did healthcare IT chose the wrong path by not choosing CCR? It certainly seems so at this point. But one must also step back and ask where the industry should be three to five years from now. Do we want Diagnostic Imaging Reports to be commonly exchanged as electronic documents? How about Consultation Notes?
In a world where we can spend 10 minutes online and pay a month’s worth of bills, buy a pair of shoes, and read the day’s headlines, why is the healthcare industry so far behind in its efforts to provide patients with a consistently efficient online experience?
We’re seeing a move from talking about the sustainability and interfacing challenges of HIE organizations to a new discussion focused on a one-to-one exchange of patient data between referring caregivers. One key element missing from the Direct Project story is a directory of providers’ Direct email addresses. How can a Direct message be sent if neither the sender nor the receiver knows the Direct email address? IHE USA has been hard at work on this project via the HPD Provider Directory Task Group.
Patient engagement is an important topic to discuss because it potentially leads to a future where everyone fully participates in their health care. For me, patient engagement is directly related to increasing health literacy, too. The more we engage, the more we learn. When this happens, we have the opportunity to live and lead a healthier life.
In 2010 with the release of proposed rules for the EHR incentive program, the HIT industry was hurled into a whirlwind and “Meaningful Use” became the buzz word of the day. Now, just the mention of two words and you can hear a silent sigh. Since the Stage 2 rules were released, communities have discussed the complexities of the standards, the need for more time and flexibility, and the lack of collaboration between policy and reality. However, recently these seemingly small discussions have become the crying out of an industry seeing a good idea go horribly wrong.
A preview of Friday’s #HITsm chat.
In her debut on the blog, Mandi Bishop highlights how the one-to-many mapping of SNOMED codes could affect patient care and their medical history.
‘The purpose of the SNOMED problem list is to inform all providers in the patient’s care continuum of any active or chronic conditions needing assessment and monitoring. With the single-click application of any given SNOMED code to an entire population of patients, it is highly likely that some, if not many, patients will be incorrectly assigned. It is unlikely that the patient will be clinically educated enough to identify, let alone explain, the difference to the network of providers participating in his or her care.’
Meaningful use criteria are indeed shaping the industry and modernizing how health data is used, but the criteria isn’t a paint-by-numbers instruction manual. IT departments should not feel reliant on or handcuffed by the ONC. There is still plenty of room for IT leaders to set ambitious, innovative goals that help create a competitive advantage through data exchange.
In 2012, the United Nations declared March 20 as the International Day of Happiness. Angela Dunn takes a look at how we track happiness and well-being…