Posts Tagged ‘Incentives’

Maryland Passes EHR Adoption Incentive Law

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

Ocean City, Maryland
Image via Wikipedia
The first state to do so, Maryland has passed a law requiring health insurers to to provide incentives to healthcare providers for their adoption of EHR systems.

As yet undecided, the incentives may take the form of increased reimbursements, lump-sum payments, in-kind services, or some combination of these.

You can view the entire text of Maryland’s HB 706 here.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Federal EHR Incentives – Carrot or Brick Wall?

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

carrotBusiness is slow for EMR/EHR software providers at a time when business should be booming. With over $20 billion of funding available in the form of reimbursements, we would expect healthcare providers to be waiting in line for their EMR/EHR implementations. Ironically, the very legislation that created this generous funding also included provisions that have given doc’s and hospitals pause. Actually, it’s more than just pause. It’s outright paralysis.

The eligibility for federal dollars is tied to “meaningful use” of “qualified” EHR sytems, which sounds simple enough. But now–nearly four months after passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)–no one knows what meaningful use is, and no one knows what a qualified EHR system is. We have some clues, but we have no official declaration.

brick-wallIf the Obabma adminstration is serious about HIT and EHRs, and it wants to see the economy benefit from this category of HIT spending (a secondary, but nonetheless important, objective of the funding), then the federal government needs to act quickly and decisively to define the eligibility criteria. If this cannot be accomplished quickly, then we’ll lose the economic stimulus feature of the plan–the economy is already starting to improve because of other measures taken and not taken. And if we miss the economic stimulus train, we might as well wait until a more considered approach can be taken with respect to HIT, including EHRs, in the broader scheme of healthcare reform.

What do you think? Is the lack of certainty with respect to EHR system eligibility criteria the main reason the rate of EHR adoption has not increased after passage of ARRA? What can the feds do to expedite development and promulgation of the eligibility criteria?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Federal EHR Incentives – Required Certification

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009

January 5 UPDATE – Definition of “Meaningful Use”

ONCHIT has released “Meaningful Use” regulations that will impact EMR certification and providers’ qualification for ARRA EMR incentives. Learn more here.

July 17 UPDATE – Multiple EHR Certification Groups

The Health IT Policy Committee has suggested that multiple groups engage in the certification of EHR systems. Previously, the Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology (CCHIT), a private organization, had a monoploy on EHR system certification. The Health IT Policy Committee also recommended that officials examine gaps between existing CCHIT certification criteria and the emerging definition of “meaningful use”.

July 16 UPDATE – Definition of “Meaningful Use”

The Health IT Policy Committee approved a work group’s revised recommendations for defining “meaningful use” of electronic health records. Current elements of the definition of “meaningful use” include:

    Allow patients to access their health records in a timely manner;

    Develop capabilities to exchange health information where possible;

    Implement at least one clinical decision support rule for a specialty or clinical priority;

    Provide patients with electronic copies of discharge instructions and procedures;

    Submit insurance claims electronically; and

    Verify insurance eligibility electronically when possible.

Read more here.

July 13 UPDATE – Definition of “Meaningful Use”

The comments period for the first release of a working definition of “meaningful use” ended on June 26. Following are links to comments submitted by a number of organizations.

    CCHIT comments
    The Markle Foundation comments
    The American Hospital Association (AHA) letter
    College of Health Information Management Executives letter
    The American Medical Association (AMA) letter and comments
    Healthcare Information Mangement Systems Society (HIMSS) comments
    eHealth Initiative comments

June 23 UPDATE – Definition of “Meaningful Use” – Standards and Certification Criteria

The HIT Standards Committee is meeting today to discuss the application of standards and certification criteria to the definition of “meaningful use” of health IT (EHR). No additional information is available at this time.

June 16 UPDATE – Definition of “Meaningful Use”

The HIT Policy Committee today offered some criteria that it feels should be part of the definition of “meaningful use”. You can view the Meaningful Use Workgroup’s June 16, 2009 update here.

April 16 UPDATE – Definition of “Meaningful Use”

A workgroup of the HIT Policy Committee has until June 16 to deliver its recommendations for a working definition of “meaningful use” of electronic health records. If the Committee approves the definition, it will be forwarded to ONCHIT for approval and adoption.

April 8 UPDATE – HIT Standards Committee and HIT Policy Committee

The HIT Standards Committee has received over 1,000 nominations, but as of today, no appointments have been made.

The HIT Policy Committee has made 13 of 20 appointments.

March 19 UPDATE – HIT Standards Committee and HIT Policy Committee

By law, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONCHIT) must announce appointments to the HIT Standards Committee and HIT Policy Committee on or before March 31, 2009. ONCHIT has not been forthcoming with news about its progress toward filling these committee posts.

March 12 UPDATE – Continuing Role for CCHIT?

During a webinar today, CCHIT Chair Mark Leavitt said he is confident that HHS will select CCHIT as the certification body identified in the stimulus law because HHS has recognized CCHIT since 2006. He thinks there is not enough time to develop a new certification group because IT systems need to be certified within the next year to qualify for stimulus package bonuses.

March 11 UPDATE – Serve on Standards or Policy Committee

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology is seeking nominations to the HIT Standards Committee and HIT Policy Committee, both created under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

The deadline for letters of nomination for both committees is March 16.  The e-mail address is HIT_FACA_nominations@hhs.gov.  The postal address is Office of the National Coordinator, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20201, Attention:  Judith Sparrow, Room 729D.

March 8 UPDATE – National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) – Role in Developing HIT and EHR Standards

As part of the Economic Stimulus Package, the NIST will receive approximately $20 Billion to fund its development of HIT infrastructure structure and related standards, including those impacting Electronic Health Records (EHR).  You can access the NIST’s Project Statement here.

Feb. 26 UPDATE – “Billions for health records rest on NIST standards”

Great article from NextGov here.

Feb. 25 Original Post: Federal EHR Incentives – Required Certification

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Economic Stimulus Bill) provides financial incentives for physicians and other healthcare providers to adopt electronic health records (EHRs). Physicians, hospitals and health systems will be eligible for the incentives through implementation of their first EHR system or completion of an ongoing EHR project. However, in order to qualify for the incentive payments, a deployed EHR system must be “certified”.

The Certification Dilemma – The certification requirements necessary to qualify for the federal EHR incentives are not known yet and may not be defined until late 2009 (or later). As of today, the EHR certification provided by a nonprofit think tank, the Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology (CCHIT), is the closest relevant certification standard in effect. But don’t necessarily rely on that certification to be the one adopted by the federal government when it decides what EHR systems will qualify for the financial incentives.

Stay Informed – On a weekly basis I will be tracking certification standards as they are promulgated by the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONCHIT), including notice of “comments periods” during which members of the public are invited to comment upon proposed regulations.

If you want to stay abreast of these certification developments, check back often for additional details, or subscribe to the RSS feed below to automatically receive updates.

  Subscribe in a reader

UPDATE – Economic Stimulus – HIT and EHR

Monday, February 9th, 2009

View the February 20, 2009 UPDATE to this post here.

Despite a vote to occur within the Senate in less than 24 hours, the text of consolidated Senate revisions to HR1 is not yet available. However, this from the United States Senate website, updated February 9, 2009. Presumably, this is the most recent (current) version of the Senate amendment affecting incentives available to EHR adopters.

Senate Amendment 570 to HR1 (scroll down to S.A.570) still contains the following language, verbatim, from HR1 regarding incentives for provider adoption of EHR:

“(B) LIMITATIONS ON AMOUNTS OF INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.–

“(i) IN GENERAL.–In no case shall the amount of the incentive payment provided under this paragraph for an eligible professional for a payment year exceed the applicable amount specified under this subparagraph with respect to such eligible professional and such year.

“(ii) AMOUNT.–Subject to clauses (iii) through (v), the applicable amount specified in this subparagraph for an eligible professional is as follows:

“(I) For the first payment year for such professional, $15,000 (or, if the first payment year for such eligible professional is 2011 or 2012, $18,000).

“(II) For the second payment year for such professional, $12,000.

“(III) For the third payment year for such professional, $8,000.

“(IV) For the fourth payment year for such professional, $4,000.

“(V) For the fifth payment year for such professional, $2,000.

“(VI) For any succeeding payment year for such professional, $0.

So, despite the headlines depicting broad HIT spending cuts by the Senate, it appears this little chunk of spending will be carried forward into the compromise bill.

  Subscribe in a reader