Thursday, November 22, 2012
Engage with Grace
Written by Alexandra Drane & The Engage with Grace Team
We make choices throughout our lives -- where we want to live, what types of activities will fill our days, with whom we spend our time.
These choices are often a balance between our desires and our means, but at the end of the day, they are decisions made with intent. But when it comes to how we want to be treated at the end our lives, often we don't express our intent or tell our loved ones about it.
This has real consequences. 73% of Americans would prefer to die at home, but up to 50% die in hospital. More than 80% of Californians say their loved ones "know exactly" or have a "good idea" of what their wishes would be if they were in a persistent coma, but only 50% say they've talked to them about their preferences.But our end of life experiences are about a lot more than statistics. They're about all of us.
So the first thing we need to do is start talking. Engage With Grace: The One Slide Project was designed with one simple goal: to help get the conversation about end of life experience started. The idea is simple: Create a tool to help get people talking. One Slide, with just five questions on it. Five questions designed to help get us talking with each other, with our loved ones, about our preferences.
And we're asking people to share this One Slide - wherever and whenever they can.at a presentation, at dinner, at their book club. Just One Slide, just five questions. Lets start a global discussion that, until now, most of us haven't had.Here is what we are asking you: Download The One Slide and share it at any opportunity - with colleagues, family, friends. Think of the slide as currency and donate just two minutes whenever you can. Commit to being able to answer these five questions about end of life experience for yourself, and for your loved ones. Then commit to helping others do the same. Get this conversation started.
Let's start a viral movement driven by the change we as individuals can effect...and the incredibly positive impact we could have collectively. Help ensure that all of us - and the people we care for - can end our lives in the same purposeful way we live them. Just One Slide, just one goal. Think of the enormous difference we can make together.
To learn more please go to www.engagewithgrace.org.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Is it possible for us to imagine a world where that power of data is not brought to bear on life and death, on clinical care, on population health?
From Farzad Mostashari's introductory comments to the HIT Policy Committee, November 7, 2012
It's been an eventful time since our last meeting together. Some of you are still struggling with the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. I know at least one of the members who is still without power and anticipating the Nor'easter bearing down on the east coast again. It demonstrated for all of us the need for us to come together and the impact that working together we can have - - private sector, philanthropies and government working together.
Of course, on everyone's mind is also another event - the elections. I was struggling last night to capture all of the swirl of thoughts and emotions about last night and I summarized it in my own mind... and on twitter... in one word and that word was "data".
It was admiration and appreciation for the role that the power of data have played in the campaign. It was also the appreciation for how that if that power of analysis and data has transformed marketing, campaigning, baseball, how is it possible for us to imagine a world where that power of data is not brought to bear on life and death, on clinical care, on population health? And affirming the path that we're on around health IT and bringing data to life.
The second was the appreciation for truth in data. There was lot of discussion that many of us followed, whatever our political persuasion, around whether the analysis of surveys was going to found to be accurate or whether the journalistic epistemology of "uncertainty equals equality" was going to be shown. There was something of I guess relief that data matters, that science matters, that predictions can be based on evidence. For all those who are following Nate Silver and 538 predictions it's truly remarkable. We sometimes see this in our little corner of the world where the preponderance of the evidence, 92% of studies can be positive and showing the benefits but if there is uncertainty, if there are differences, the journalistic urge to create some sort of narrative of two equally opposing realities can become the narrative of the day. So there was relief in seeing the truth in data.
And finally there was the relief when those probabilities converge to the binary, the zero/one, the data, the fact of the election - that goes either one way or another and resolves itself. Now we are thinking "what does this mean?" Everybody would agree that it gives us in the administration more time to finish the job. We've made incredible progress in the past four years on health IT. In my view it gives us a chance to continue to make strides, to continue the essential thrust of the policies and approaches. But it also, as was pointed out, affirms our responsibility to do the people's work, to come together, Republicans and Democrats, to do the people's work. This committee appointed by Republicans and Democrats with stakeholders from patient advocates, doctors, hospitals, payers, researchers, vendors embodies that coming together for the common work - - the focus on challenges that we can only solve together.
We can disagree sometimes on how to get there. Progress has always been through fits and starts. it hasn't always been straight line. Not always smooth path. But the painstaking work of building consensus -- there 's no substitute for that in health IT, in standards or in the broader policies. And that is what we are commited to - the painstaking work of building consensus.
Now as we look at what the president said -- that the value of citizenship doesn't end with our vote. It's not just about what could be done for us, but about what could be done by us through the hard and frustrating but necessary work of self-government. That's what this Policy Committee, to me, embodies. We need to keep reaching, keep working, keep fighting and take the time to look afresh at what we're doing.
Today we'll go through the next stage request for comments that the meaningful use work group, information exchange work group, privacy and security work group and others have put together. One thing I'd like to challenge us is whether we're pushing hard enough on interoperability. Whether there is more that we can do. Whether it's around query based exchange and all the cluster of identity matching and patient consent issues that come with that. Are we moving fast enough with the privacy and security that must accompany the greater availability and greater flow of information? Whether it's around two factor authentication, or audits and consent management for sensitive information? Whether we are doing enough to make sure as we make progress that safety is addressed as much as it possibly can. And that we're setting the stage for innovation.
So that is going to be the opportunity for us, as we move forward, to step back also. I'd like to ask the policy committee, as we'll go through the request for comment, to at least just ask if there's more. If there's a slightly different take that we could pursue to make these come true. Although we have been given more time -- a week, a month, a year - - and before you know it, the opportunity for that urgency is lost.
Thank you.
Monday, October 1, 2012
Digital Data Improvement Priorities for Continuous Learning in Health and Health Care
Digital Data Improvement Priorities for Continuous Learning in Health and Health Care - Workshop Summary - available free from the Institute of Medicine.
"Digital health data are the lifeblood of a continuous learning health system. A steady flow of reliable data is necessary to coordinate and monitor patient care, analyze and improve systems of care, conduct research to develop new products and approaches, assess the effectiveness of medical interventions, and advance population health. The totality of available health data is a crucial resource that should be considered an invaluable public asset in the pursuit of better care, improved health, and lower health care costs."
Dr. Rich Platt, Harvard Medical School's Department of Population Medicine and I co-presented on distributed data networks. Our themes included:
- Distributed data queries can provide the foundation of a learning health system.
- Advantages of distributed data networks include data accuracy, timeliness, flexibility, and sustainability.
- Distributed queries facilitate asking questions of large datasets in ways that are HIPAA-compliant and maintain local context.
Friday, September 21, 2012
2014 Standards & Certification Criteria - Final Rule
Presentation by Steve Posnack to the HIT Standards Committee - September 19, 2012
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Towards a Learning Health System
This article was originally published on It Takes a Community, the Allscripts blog
This past year, I took a leave of absence from Allscripts to serve as the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC) coordinator for Query Health, an Open Government Initiative that is establishing standards, policies and services for distributed population queries of clinical records. It comes at a unique moment in time – at the confluence of broad deployment of Electronic Health Records, the compelling need for standards for secondary use of that healthcare information, and a Stage 3 Meaningful Use strategy that focuses on a “learning health system.” That is, a system in which the vast array of health data can be aggregated, analyzed, and leveraged using real-time algorithms and functions.
I’m thrilled to be back and sharing what I learned about what we can do to implement a learning health system that benefits patients on a national scale.
Our work began in August 2011 in Washington D.C., with a “Summer Concert Series” environmental scan of the best work on distributed queries happening around the country. I collaborated with some of the top folks in the industry from the more than 100 member organizations. It was energizing to be engaged with colleagues so deeply committed and passionate about improving health care.
My job was to lead the overall initiative representing ONC. Clinical, operations and technical workgroups, each with around 40 members, delivered the functional and operational requirements, the technical approach, the proposed standards and reference implementations. We actively engaged with the National Coordinator, the HIT Standards Committee, the HIT Policy Committee and the Privacy and Security Tiger team to ensure that Query Health aligned with broad national priorities and strategies.
Understanding Population Health
Distributed population queries can be applied to a variety of secondary uses. Distributed population queries enable an understanding of population measures of health, performance, disease and quality, while respecting patient privacy, to improve patient and population health and reduce costs.
Distributed population queries are a central component of ONC’s strategy for a learning health system. These queries “send questions to the data” and return aggregate population measures that keep patient-level information protected at the source.
We use distributed population queries today for a variety of purposes. For example, public health tracks diseases, including flu-like illness, and evaluates optimization of scarce resources. The FDA evaluates signals related to drug safety once drugs are released to the market. Researchers compare the relative effectiveness of drugs and treatments.
Putting It into Practice
There are five Query Health pilots kicking off this Summer and Fall.
- The New York City and State public health departments are sending questions to both provider practices and RHIOs related to diabetes and hypertension.
- The Food and Drug Administration is sending questions to a clinical data source at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center to evaluate which post-market drug surveillance questions can be supported by clinical data.
- The Massachusetts Department of Public Health is sending diabetes-related questions to community health centers and provider practices.
- The Centers for Disease Control is applying Query Health standards to its BioSense 2 cloud-based distributed data repository for situation awareness and disease syndromes.
- Allscripts is testing the applicability of Query Health to dynamically query for clinical quality measures.
Query Health standards are being prepared for standards ballot by HL7 and ONC’s Office of Science and Technology. The standard for Queries is based on an improved, more parsimonious version of the Health Quality Measure Format or HQMF. The standard for Results is the Quality Reporting Document Architecture or QRDA (Categories 2 & 3). The target data is aligned with the S&I Framework Clinical Element Data Dictionary, the National Quality Forum’s Quality Data Model and the HL7 Consolidated CDA.
What’s your take on how the Query Health initiative can improve how we use health IT for the benefit of patient and patient populations? Do you have new ideas we haven’t yet considered? Share your thoughts below.
Friday, August 24, 2012
Meaningful Use Stage 2 and 2014 Edition - Resources
ONC Final Rule
- Read the ONC Final Rule [PDF - 1.3 MB]
- ONC Fact Sheet: 2014 Edition Standards & Certification Criteria (S&CC) Final Rule [PDF - 1 MB]
- HHS Press Release
ONC Resources
- 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria Required to Satisfy the Base EHR Definition [PDF - 1 MB]
- Equivalency Table [PDF - 1 MB]
- Do you have EHR Technology that meets the new Certified EHR Technology definition for Meaningful Use Stage 1? [PPTX - 267 KB]
- Do you have EHR Technology that meets the new Certified EHR Technology definition for Meaningful Use Stage 2? [PPTX - 266 KB]
- 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria Mapped to the 2014 CEHRT Definition for EPs Seeking to Achieve MU Stage 1 in and after CY 2014 [PPTX - 65 KB]
- 2014 Edition EHR Certification Criteria Required to Satisfy the Complete EHR Definition [PDF - 1 MB]
CMS Final Rule
Monday, July 23, 2012
Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Data Workshop
Series of outstanding presentations from PCORI's electronic data workshop.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Query Health at the HITPC / HITSC Clinical Quality Hearing
From testimony at the Health IT Policy Committee and Health IT Standards Committee Clinical Quality Hearing, June 7, 2012.
Query Health is working to establish standards to "send questions to the data" while keeping patient level information safe at the data source. Distributed query networks are using these standards in pilots for insights on diabetes and hypertension, national and regional situation awareness, post-market surveillance and dynamic querying for quality measures.
How can the measure development process be improved?
The policy and standards committees have the opportunity to introduce strategic changes that result in agile, responsive, clinically relevant measures in Stage 3.
The clinical quality measure development process today is slow and unresponsive to the rapidly evolving state of medicine in this country. Measures may take one to two years to define, and once defined, measures then take several more years to move through the regulatory cycle, be incorporated into EHR systems, be deployed to providers and then finally implemented for reporting.
Quality measures, even in their latest most formal expression using the Health Quality Measure Format (HQMF), are impossible for a system to digest “automagically”, as HQMF is verbose and not fully computable, with aspects of the measure even described in text. Ambiguity in measure specification leads to multiple interpretations by providers and thus variability, which then requires rework during implementation of the measure in the field.
EHR developers who work with quality measures have described the need for greater clarity and specificity on the supporting data requirements up front, and validation that required data elements can be effectively collected in the provider workflow.
Measure development can also be improved by focusing on a common set of building blocks which could be used to create simple computable queries, which could in turn serve as the foundation for more complex queries. This will also help us to mature the queries without having to re-implement and redefine every concept as part of each individual complex query.
How can measures better leverage electronic health record capabilities?
In collaboration with HL7, NQF and CMS, Query Health standards will enable Health IT vendors to dynamically respond to queries, including queries that align with quality measures. So assuming the data is being captured, the quality measure cycle time could go from years to truly a matter of days. The ability to generate measures nationally in a short cycle time has powerful benefits for patients and patient populations while enabling researchers and healthcare organizations to substantially reduce costs and increase speed.
Blackford talked about the importance of having an externalized set of target data that could deal with the curly braces problem. Query Health standards do just that in a manner that is aligned with the Quality Data Model and Consolidated CDA. Query Health standards provide a road map to better leverage EHR capabilities for dynamic querying of the EHR for quality measures. The standards include the questions (a “new” more parsimonious HQMF), the target data (ONC’s Clinical Element Data Dictionary or CEDD), the results (QRDA Categories 2 & 3) and the Query Envelope.
A Query Health pilot being conducted by Allscripts will evaluate Query Health standards and target data to deliver sample quality measures.
How can the measurement infrastructure and data be leveraged for other types of improvement?
Quality measures are an important class of aggregate measures that can be immensely valuable. Clinical quality measure queries, with the Query Health standards applied, align with the Stage 3 goals for improved outcomes and establishing a learning health system through rapid feedback mechanisms.
Pooled “big data” in healthcare has its benefits but also has several drawbacks. “Big data” is typically managed in large pooled data sets, combining data from many settings of care. While there are terrific applications for pooled data, including registries and other successful use of large research and commercial databases, there are also critical issues of policy and strategy that must be resolved. Query Health standards can serve as the safe on-ramp to “big data”.
Ultimately, we're at a defining moment for standards that will enable quality measures and big data analytics in a distributed environment. Researchers will be able to leverage these standards to “send questions to the data.” Questions can be sent to numerous data sources including EHRs, HIEs, PHRs, payers’ clinical record or any other clinical record. Aggregate responses leave patient level information secure behind the data source’s firewall. Those responses can support questions related to disease outbreak, quality, research, post-market surveillance, performance, utilization, public health, prevention, resource optimization and many others. The opportunities are truly endless. Thank you.
Labels:
#QueryHealth
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Query Health - by the numbers
I'm finishing up a year with the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT. Thought you'd be interested in this blog post, summing up the work on Query Health.
Query Health – by the
numbers
From Rich Elmore, Coordinator, Query Health
I wanted to share with you an update on Query Health - - by
the numbers.
One
|
Transformative
concept
|
Sending questions to the data
|
Two
|
Operational
documents
|
1) Data
use agreement
2) Operational
guidance
|
Three
|
Reference
Implementations
|
1) i2b2
2) PopMedNet
3) hQuery
|
Four
|
Standards
|
1) Question
(HQMF)
2) Data
(CEDD)
3) Results
(QRDA Cat 2&3)
4) Query
Envelope
|
Five
|
Pilots
|
1) NYC/NYS
DPH
2) Mini-Sentinel
(FDA/BID)
3) CDC
BioSense 2
4) Mass
DPH
5) CQM
(Allscripts)
|
The Query Health technical work group is making fantastic
progress on the reference implementations. We’ve also had recent exciting
news with ONC and HL7 working jointly on preparing HQMF and QRDA for ballot,
and ONC and NQF working jointly on aligning CEDD with QDM.
The Query Health pilots are poised to ask and answer
important questions related to diabetes, hypertension, post-market
surveillance, situation awareness and clinical quality measures.
Most importantly, Query Health aligns with the concept of a
learning health system, focusing on improving patient and population outcomes.
All of this is the result of the energized, expert, engaged
community that have provided shape and direction for distributed population
queries. Thank you to all of the Query Health members and support team
for your outstanding contributions!
The time I had promised to ONC has gone by so quickly.
I am thrilled that Feik (John Feikema) is taking the reins. We’ve been
working together on the transition for the past month and the project will not
miss a beat.
Onward!
Rich
Labels:
#QueryHealth
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Todd Park, Chief Technology Officer for the U.S.
Todd Park recently assumed the role of Chief Technology Officer (CTO) for the United States reporting to the President. Last April, Todd (then CTO of Health and Human Services), Josh Seidman and I participated on a panel moderated by Sean Nolan on Citizen-Centric Health: How Public/Private Partnerships are Changing the Game. Todd's energy and passion on that panel were so great, that it is worthwhile reprising here.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Standards for Distributed Population Health Queries
Originally published in Faster Cures' "bloggersation" regarding: What is the most important thing that could happen in 2012 to ensure better utilization of big data—housed in EMRs or other platforms—for drug development?
“Big data” is typically managed in large pooled data sets, combining data from many settings of care. While there are terrific applications of pooled data, including registries and successful use of large research databases, there are critical issues of policy and strategy. Pooled “Big data” in healthcare has its benefits but also has several drawbacks.
From a policy perspective, pooled data approaches are problematic. Large pools of PHI are targets for attack from bad actors. Also, many PHI-holders have their own consent agreements with their patients. It is difficult to manage these different consent agreements when pooling PHI in one place. Additionally, HIPAA requires covered entities to control the flow of PHI, either directly or through agreements. When data is pooled, the party pooling the data must have a business associate agreement or data use agreement (in the case of research databases) with each covered entity that contributes data to the pool, with the same (or similar terms). This can be impracticable for the third party or undesirable for covered entities, as they often have to agree to non-negotiable terms in the agreement in order to pool their data.
From a strategic standpoint, pooled data is inflexible, stale and inaccurate. Pooled data approaches aren’t generally sustainable: the benefits of pooled approaches are too indirect to support the operational costs and complexity. Furthermore, health care organizations are unwilling to lose control of their information not just for policy reasons, but also due to competitive considerations.
But the absence of a standards-based alternative has given rise to pooled data approaches with all of these substantial drawbacks.
2012 is the defining moment for new standards that will enable big data analytics in a distributed environment. An ONC sponsored open government initiative, Query Health, is defining the standards and specifications for distributed population queries. Researchers will be able to leverage these standards to be “send questions to the data”. Questions can be sent to data sources including EHRs, HIEs, PHRs, payers’ clinical record or any other clinical record. Aggregate responses leave patient level information secure behind the data source’s firewall. Aggregate responses support questions related to disease outbreak, quality, CER, post-market surveillance, performance, utilization, public health, prevention, resource optimization and many others.
The path for these new standards will dramatically cut cycle time for deployment of new questions from years to days – making possible support for a learning health system.
The focus of 2012 should be laying the foundation for success: defining the standards and services for distributed population health queries. This is one extremely impactful way to leverage the potential of big data for research. For more information, visit QueryHealth.org.
“Big data” is typically managed in large pooled data sets, combining data from many settings of care. While there are terrific applications of pooled data, including registries and successful use of large research databases, there are critical issues of policy and strategy. Pooled “Big data” in healthcare has its benefits but also has several drawbacks.
From a policy perspective, pooled data approaches are problematic. Large pools of PHI are targets for attack from bad actors. Also, many PHI-holders have their own consent agreements with their patients. It is difficult to manage these different consent agreements when pooling PHI in one place. Additionally, HIPAA requires covered entities to control the flow of PHI, either directly or through agreements. When data is pooled, the party pooling the data must have a business associate agreement or data use agreement (in the case of research databases) with each covered entity that contributes data to the pool, with the same (or similar terms). This can be impracticable for the third party or undesirable for covered entities, as they often have to agree to non-negotiable terms in the agreement in order to pool their data.
From a strategic standpoint, pooled data is inflexible, stale and inaccurate. Pooled data approaches aren’t generally sustainable: the benefits of pooled approaches are too indirect to support the operational costs and complexity. Furthermore, health care organizations are unwilling to lose control of their information not just for policy reasons, but also due to competitive considerations.
But the absence of a standards-based alternative has given rise to pooled data approaches with all of these substantial drawbacks.
2012 is the defining moment for new standards that will enable big data analytics in a distributed environment. An ONC sponsored open government initiative, Query Health, is defining the standards and specifications for distributed population queries. Researchers will be able to leverage these standards to be “send questions to the data”. Questions can be sent to data sources including EHRs, HIEs, PHRs, payers’ clinical record or any other clinical record. Aggregate responses leave patient level information secure behind the data source’s firewall. Aggregate responses support questions related to disease outbreak, quality, CER, post-market surveillance, performance, utilization, public health, prevention, resource optimization and many others.
The path for these new standards will dramatically cut cycle time for deployment of new questions from years to days – making possible support for a learning health system.
The focus of 2012 should be laying the foundation for success: defining the standards and services for distributed population health queries. This is one extremely impactful way to leverage the potential of big data for research. For more information, visit QueryHealth.org.
Labels:
Query Health
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Meaningful Use Stage 2
HHS News Release
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced the next steps for providers who are using electronic health record (EHR) technology and receiving incentive payments from Medicare and Medicaid. These proposed rules, from the Centers for Medicaid & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), will govern stage 2 of the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Programs.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced the next steps for providers who are using electronic health record (EHR) technology and receiving incentive payments from Medicare and Medicaid. These proposed rules, from the Centers for Medicaid & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), will govern stage 2 of the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Programs.
“We know that broader adoption of electronic health records can save our health care system money, save time for doctors and hospitals, and save lives,” said Secretary Sebelius. “We have seen great success and momentum as we’ve taken the first steps toward adoption of this critical technology. As we move into the next stage, we are encouraging even more providers to participate and support more coordinated, patient-centered care.”
Under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, eligible health care professionals and hospitals can qualify for Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments when they adopt certified EHR technology and use it in a meaningful way. What is considered “meaningful use” is evolving in three stages:
- Stage 1 (which began in 2011 and remains the starting point for all providers): “meaningful use” consists of transferring data to EHRs and being able to share information, including electronic copies and visit summaries for patients.
- Stage 2 (to be implemented in 2014 under the proposed rule): “meaningful use” includes new standards such as online access for patients to their health information, and electronic health information exchange between providers.
- Stage 3 (expected to be implemented in 2016): “meaningful use” includes demonstrating that the quality of health care has been improved.
CMS’ proposed rule specifies the stage 2 criteria that eligible providers must meet in order to qualify for Medicare and/or Medicaid EHR incentive payments. It also specifies Medicare payment adjustments that, beginning in 2015, providers will face if they fail to demonstrate meaningful use of certified EHR technology and fail to meet other program participation requirements. In a November 2011 “We Can’t Wait” announcement (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/11/20111130a.html), the Department outlined plans to provide an additional year for providers who attested to meaningful use in 2011. Under today’s proposed rule, stage 1 has been extended an additional year, allowing providers to attest to stage 2 in 2014, instead of in 2013. The proposed rule announced by ONC identifies standards and criteria for the certification of EHR technology, so eligible professionals and hospitals can be sure that the systems they adopt are capable of performing the required functions to demonstrate either stage of meaningful use that would be in effect starting in 2014.
“Through the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs, we’ve seen incredible progress as over 43,000 providers have received $3.1 billion to help make the transition to electronic health records,” said CMS Acting Administrator Marilyn Tavenner. “There is great momentum as the number of providers adopting this technology grows every month. Today’s announcement will help ensure broad participation and success of the program, as we move toward full adoption of this money-saving and life-saving technology.”
“The proposed rules for stage 2 for meaningful use and updated certification criteria largely reflect the recommendations from the Health IT Policy and Standards Committees, the federal advisory committees that operate through a transparent process with broad public input from all key stakeholders. Their recommendations emphasized the desire to increase health information exchange, increase patient and family engagement, and better align reporting requirements with other HHS programs,” said Farzad Mostashari, MD, ScM, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. “The proposed rules announced today will continue down the path stage 1 established by focusing on value-added ways in which EHR systems can help providers deliver care which is more coordinated, safer, patient-centered, and efficient.”
The number of hospitals using EHRs has more than doubled in the last two years from 16 to 35 percent between 2009 and 2011. Eighty-five percent of hospitals now report that by 2015 they intend to take advantage of the incentive payments.
A technical fact sheet on CMS’s proposed rule is available at http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/fact_sheets.asp.
A technical fact sheet on ONC’s standards and certification criteria proposed rule is available athttp://www.healthit.gov/policy-research.
The proposed rules announced today may be viewed at www.ofr.gov/inspection.aspx. Comments are due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Query Health: Distributed Population Queries
By Michael Buck and Rich Elmore (and originally published in Health Data Management)
Query Health is an Open Government Initiative that is establishing the standards and services for distributed population health queries. Query Health standards will be used to send questions to clinical data sources which return aggregate measures of population health that can be used for many purposes including disease outbreak monitoring, post-market surveillance, comparative effectiveness research, quality and performance measures.
Query Health is pleased to announce the commitment of leading healthcare organizations to pilot the Query Health standards and specifications. Query Health also plans to present its progress on proposed standards and reference implementation at the HIMSS conference in Las Vegas, February 20-24, 2012. And in an unexpected twist, Query Health standards will deliver potential benefits beyond the scope of distributed population queries.
Announcing the first Query Health Pilot
Today, Query Health is announcing that the Primary Care Information Project (PCIP), within the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and the New York State Department of Public Health have announced plans to pilot the Query Health standards and reference implementation. PCIP recently won awards for their work on distributed queries including the 2011 HIMSS Public Health Davies Award of Excellence and Healthcare Informatics first place Innovator Award. They will be using Query Health standards to expand their existing population health monitoring network from an existing 1.6 million ambulatory patients to encompass citywide HIE organizational coverage of both inpatient and outpatient encounters. This enhanced system will support optimal allocation of limited public health resources.
What will be shown at HIMSS?
ONC will host a demonstration of Query Health’s progress on the reference implementation including a live demo of distributed query execution.
· ONC Booth Theater on Wednesday February 22nd at 9:45 AM.
· HIMSS Interoperability Showcase Stage on Thursday February 23rd at 9:30 AM
Are there benefits beyond distributed population queries?
The path for a quality measure today is measured in years from the time of measure definition to delivery in vendor systems and deployment in EHRs. Want another quality measure? Wait several years.
In collaboration with HL7, NQF and CMS, Query Health standards will enable Health IT vendors to dynamically respond to queries, including queries that align with quality measures. So assuming the data is being captured, the cycle time could go from years to days.
The ability to generate measures nationally in a short cycle time has powerful benefits for patients, patient populations while enabling researchers and healthcare organizations to substantially reduce costs and increase speed.
What is Query Health?
Query Health was launched September 2011, with approximately 100 committed member organizations representing diverse healthcare stakeholders contributing to the project.
Today, when health researchers develop questions about a population, in many cases they manually pose these questions to care delivery organizations, which employ technical teams to manually generate queries and produce reports. Even where distributed queries are automated, the costs and time to link each data source are unacceptably high. The Query Health Initiative will make this much more efficient: the question can be delivered in a format that will be interpreted automatically by an HIT system. The HIT system will then generate a report with the “answer” to the query.
Questions can be sent to many different types of data sources including providers’ EHRs, payers’ clinical records, personal health records and health information exchanges. Decisions about which queries to process are under control of the data owner and the aggregated results protect patient level data, which remains safely behind data owners’ firewalls.
For more information:
For more information on Query Health initiative, visit the Query Health website http://www.QueryHealth.org or contact admin@siframework.org.
The authors:
Michael Buck is the clinical work group leader for Query Health and director for the NYC/NYS pilot. Dr. Buck is also Biomedical Informatics R&D Manager at New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and Adjunct Associate Research Scientist at Columbia University’s Department of Biomedical Informatics.
Rich Elmore is the ONC Coordinator for Query Health.
Labels:
#QueryHealth,
Query Health
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Medical Errors Due to Indecipherable Prescriptions
Thanks to e-Patient Dave for the image.
See also the recent report Hospital Incident Reporting Systems Do Not Capture Most Patient Harm which found that "Hospital staff did not report 86 percent of events to incident reporting systems, partly because of staff misperceptions about what constitutes patient harm".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)