Dr. Karen Bell, Chair of the Certification Commission (CCHIT) posted an entry to the EHR Decisions site earlier this week summarizing the results of a survey about stages 2 and 3 of meaningful use. Of the MU objectives felt to be problematic, nine were identified as being too aggressive by most of the respondents:
- Syndromic surveillance
- Drug formulary checks
- Medication reconciliation
- Patient access to health information within four days
- Submission of immunization data
- Capacity to exchange key clinical information
- Clinical decision support
- Submission of reportable lab data (and reconciliation with orders)
- Drug allergy/etc. check (predominantly for Stage 3)
It is worth reading the detail behind each of these issues as there are caveats and explanations in Dr. Bell’s narrative. The post closes with the following paragraph:
“Lastly, we received numerous comments about the importance of assuring that finally adopted objectives and measures reflect those processes that are, in fact, in the providers’ control. While many of the objectives, and measures proposed by the Workgroup are laudable in their own right, putting individual providers financially at risk for results beyond their control is counterproductive to the overall goal of widespread provider adoption of HIT that is used in a meaningful manner.”
Question: What do you think about the survey results?
This post is the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the American College of Physicians (ACP). ACP does not endorse a specific EHR brand or product and ACP makes no representations, warranties, or assurances as to the accuracy or completeness of the information provided herein.