Thursday, September 16, 2010

A Summary of Meaningful Use for Non-US Readers

This post comes at the request of some of my colleages from outside the US who want to understand more about what we are doing in our "National Healthcare Programme".  It might also be helpful for US readers that have been hiding under a rock for the last 12 months.

The US Federal governent allocated something like $33,000 Million to our "Ministry of Health" (called the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS).  This is to support use of Electronic Health Records as part of our Economic Recovery.  This originated as a spending bill for economic recovery, so just about everything in it is rapidly paced because recovery $ need to be spent to be effective.

PurposeAllocation ($M US)
Medicare/Medicaid Incentives20,819
Broadband Access4,700
Distance Learning, Telemedicine and Broadband2,500
Office of the National Coordinator2,000
Health centers1,500
Comparative Effectiveness Research1,100
Social Security Administration500
Indian Health Services85
Veteran's Administration50

About $20,000 Million of this is allocated to "Incentive Payments" for hosptials and individual physicians and group practices to use electronic health records.  These incentive payments stretch out over four to five years, and can be as much as $44,000 to $64,000 per healthcare provider depending upon which Federal programs they provide treatment under.  Medicare is our Federally funded healthcare mostly for retirees, and Medicaid are Federal grants to the States to provide healthcare for poor and at risk populations.  The incentive payments are staged so that the biggest chunk shows up first, and then smaller and smaller chunks.  The criteria for recieving payments are also staged.  Just entering the door is probably the hardest, and also has the biggest ROI and payments.  But there will be subsequent requirements staged about 2 years apart that raise the bar incrementally, and those also have additional payments associated with them.  After 2015, instead of incentive payments (the carrot), healthcare providers that are NOT using HIT will start getting penalties which increase yearly (the stick).

As part of that law, Congress formally created the "Office of the National Coordinator of Healthcare IT".  Formerly shortend to ONCHIT, it now goes by the acronym ONC in most circles (until someone gets annoyed at them again).  This week they are ONC to me.  That office was given $2,000 million to spend on different programs. That office was originally created by a memo from the President in 2004 to our Chief Minsister of Health (the Secretary of HHS).  That office had spearheaded the development of 4 prior programs, HITSP, HISPC, CCHIT, and NHIN, and now is responsible for quite a bit more.
Allocation
($M US)
Purpose
643Regional Extension Centers
547State HIE Funding
265Beacon Community Grants
118Workforce Development 
60SHARP Grants

Regional Extension Centers are organizations designed to help educate healthcare providers about electronic health records, and to help them choose and implement them.  These are mostly organized around the states.  Besides educating doctors and helping them with implementations, these organizations are also approving and developing purchasing agreements with healthcare product vendors.

State HIE Grants to help build healthcare information exchanges.

I believe $20 Million of the ONC funds were transferred to our National Insitute of Standards and Technology (but it may simply have been a $20M appropriate, NIST has the money either way).  This is the same organization that built the reference implementation of XDS and supports a great deal of IHE Connectathon testing -- not just here in the US, but also internationally.

There are also 11 Federally funded contracts to build what is called the Standards and Interoperability framework. I don't know how this is going to turn out, but it could wind up being something like the Canadian Standards Collaborative that Mike Nusbaum wrote for me in A Canadian Perspective on Standards Harmonization. Of course, things will definately have a US rather than Canadian flavor, but we all speak the same language, Eh?

In order to recieve Incentive payments, physicians must use certified EHR technology.  That means that there has to be a certifying body.  There used to be only one under a prior federal contract, CCHIT, but now there is also the Drummond Group, and there are expected to be more.  I've heard as many as 12 have applied to be in the role.

To be a certified product, EHR Vendors must show that their EHR systems meet some or all of the criteria specified in federal regulations (see links above).  Those criteria require the use of certain standards, most notably the HL7 CCD for patient summaries (but they may also use CCR, pretty much a standard only used in the US), and HL7 V2.3.1 or V2.5.1 for labs, immunizations, and public health reporting.   Eventually, we will have an accrediting body (much like our ANSI accredits standards organinzations), certifying bodies (like CCHIT and Drummond), and testing laboratories, but for now, we just have certifying bodies and the rest of the infrastructure is expected to show up in a year or so.

Overseeing all this are two "Federal Advisory Committees", one which addresses Healthcare Policy, setting national goals, et cetera, and the other which addresses Healthcare Standards.  These bodies ADVISE our government though, and so even their recommendations can be ignored.  Our Secretary of Health and Human Services (you can think of her as our Minister of Health) is the one that has the final say on what gets done and what doesn't get done.

Now, I mentioned that Healthcare Providers have to use Certified EHR technology.  In fact, the way the regulations are written, they have to use it in certain ways prescribed by the regulation, and show that they have in order to recieve the incentive payments.  That includes using it to exchange information using standards, recieve lab results, prescribe medications, and to gather and report on a number of different quality measures considered to be national priorities.

Not quite one page, and no cartoons, but there it is.

Limited number of seats still available for CONNECT Code-A-Thon at the Mayo Clinic on September 21-22!
CONNECT Hosts the Nationwide Health Information Network Direct Project for First Co-Located Coding Event!
There are a limited number of seats still available for the CONNECT Code-A-Thon taking place in Rochester, MN September 21-22. As a participant, you'll be working with other health IT leaders as you contribute to the CONNECT solution and advance the nation's health IT agenda during this two-day event hosted by Mayo Clinic.

The Nationwide Health Information Network Direct Project (http://nhindirect.org) will be participating in the event. Members of the Direct community interested in participating in the Direct Project's working session at the event should register directly for the CONNECT Code-A-Thon. The Direct Project attendees will participate in the introductory and wrap-up sessions for the Code-A-Thon, and during the work sessions, they will break out into a Direct-focused session.


Date:

September 21-22, 2010 (Tues. & Wed.)

Time:

9:00 am - 5:00 pm

Location:

The Kahler Grand Hotel
20 SW Second Avenue, Rochester, MN 55902
(800) 533-1655

As part of the evolution of the CONNECT Code-A-Thons to address Community feedback, the Rochester event will begin with a plenary session. This session includes presentations about the latest developments in the CONNECT code and the future of the CONNECT architecture.

The event is limited to 200 participants, and spaces are available on a first come, first served basis. This is a coding event, so participants should be developers ready to roll up their sleeves and get to work! The event will be a hands-on working session where attendees and the CONNECT development team will have the chance to collaborate, share ideas and best practices.

Participants will have the opportunity to contribute to the CONNECT project through bug fixes, code contributions, improved documentation, and by contributing other innovations. We will be listing topics on the forums and we encourage discussions prior to the Code-A-Thon so we can get straight to the business of development during the event.

Click here to register for this FREE event.

Provide any additional topics you would like to cover on the forums page.

Federal Health Architecture Program Management Office
Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT
Department of Health and Human Services
Mary E. Switzer Building
330 C Street, S.W., 1st Floor, Washington, D.C. 20201

Website: healthIT.hhs.gov
CONNECT Website: connectopensource.org
Main phone number: (202) 205-8614
General Email: connect@hhs.gov


Wednesday, September 15, 2010

HIMSS11 Interoperability Showcase Registration - 8/16 - 10/8

This announcement crossed my desk this morning. The showcase routinely attracts (over the last 5 years), 8 - 12% of the HIMSS audience. Even when it is in another room, it's a huge draw. I'll be there, will you?

Keith

 

Dates: February 21 – 24, 2011
Registration Opens: August 16 – October 8, 2010

 

For more information about the Interoperability Showcase please contact the Showcase Team at InteroperabilityShowcase@himss.org or call +1-312-915-9213.

The opportunities and challenges for healthcare have never been greater. From the new administration in the U.S. to Ministries of Health in nations worldwide, one of the common solutions is the adoption and smart use of health information technologies.  But just having health IT solutions in a large hospital, a small one doctor ambulatory practice, or a region-wide health information exchange is not enough—technology cannot just be present – it must be integrated into the practice so that using technology is as natural and part of the routine as gathering a patient's vitals and family history.

Making it all work is not unlike putting together a puzzle. A critical piece of the puzzle is ensuring not only that the health IT systems used are standards-based but can seamlessly exchange and effectively utilize the healthcare data provided. This is IHE's role; to provide the framework in this puzzle by connecting or integrating all of the healthcare-based standards and build an inoperable healthcare system for the future. 
Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) is at center stage leading this important initiative. Learn more about IHE's role in standards-based integration and how you or your company can participate.

Demonstrate Leadership in Healthcare Integration:

Participate in HIMSS Interoperability Showcases


As new IHE profiles (About IHE) are released as a result of IHE's development work the next step is to demonstrate at a HIMSS Interoperability Showcase, the seamless transfer of standards-based health IT technologies across multiple vendor systems using real-time data. This unique and interactive display of interoperability allows end-users and vendors to gain a hands-on experience of how we can use HIT to improve patient care by harmonizing healthcare information exchanges. More importantly, IHE and the Interoperability Showcases bring together the industry's most fierce competitors and top IT experts to work at the same table and build technical frameworks and Integration Profiles for interoperable systems.

Implementation Workgroup

I missed the HIT Standards Implementation Workgroup call, but I took a look at their slides after hearing some feedback on the call. The slides appear below.


The real meat starts at slide 7.

1. Keep it simple: Think big but start small, and make standards be as minimal as required to support a necessary policy objective.
My comments:  But don't assume you get to start from scratch either.  The charge of the Standards FACA is mostly to identify and not to "Create".

2. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of good enough. 
My comments:  In general I agree, but we also have a responsibility to ensure the safety of patients.

3. Keep the implementation cost as low as possible!
My comments:  YES!

4. Design for the little guy.
My comments:  YES!

5. Do not try to create a one size fits all standard.
My comments:  DO NOT ASSUME that you need to CREATE a standard.

Slide  8
6. Separate Content and transmission standards.
My Comments:  YES!

7.  Create publicly available vocabularies and code sets.
My comments:  YES! [with a little nit about terms, because I think they mean to say vocabularies and VALUE sets].

8.  Leverage the web for transport.
My comments:  YES, and thats obvious, but let's move on, there's another agenda here that I'll get to in a minute.

9.  Position Quality Measures so that they motivate standards adoption.
My comments:  Quality is the goal, and it starts with a good process up front.  I've been down this path before.  To engineer quality in means that measurement must be built into the process, and that means we need to develop good standards for describing quality healthcare guidelines with measurment built in. The current thinking appears to be that you can measure quality of a process after the fact and get results.  That may be true, but the best results come with quality baked in, so that thinking needs to change.

If you can describe a quality process and the data needed to execute it (not the logic, JUST the data), you can automate not just the computation of measures, but the capture of the data, AND the creation of interfaces to exchange that data. The logic is important, but LOGIC is SOFTWARE, not data.

10.  Support implementators
My comments:  Absolutely.  But that will require some investments in IP from SDO and PEO organizations so that you can put all the pieces together, or development of completely new content based on that, which will have to track work products from differnt organizations.  This is an obvious item, but it will take time.  If all SDOs agreed to one STRUCTURED documentation format to use (and don't JUST say XML, it needs to be more than just XML), it would be a lot easier, but THAT will take a long time.  Don't think this will be cheap either.

Slide 9
OK, so here is where John gets to guide the agenda, and it is a bit slanted.  The REST/SOAP debate is old news, and we know there are some issues that need to be worked out.

Slide 10
But here is where I get just a bit hacked off.  How about fairly representing the position of all sides of a discussion instead of just the side that you favor?  I should be able to expect better than this.  Sean, Adam, Wes and John have all clearly come out complaining about SOAP, but at the same time, when the standards were developed, SOAP was the thing to do because of weaknesses in HTTP that still haven't been addressed.  Don't get me wrong, I like REST.  REST is the complete foundation of this blog, so I get it.  But I'd like to see SOME signs that people are also listening to BOTH sides of a conversation, not just their own.

This is where I stop my commentary on the slides and move on to other topics.

These workgroups need to get CLOSER to the implementer, the people designing and implementing code. When is the last time any of them have written code?  How far are they away from the people who are actually writing code?  It's good to be an advocate for people in the trenches, but it you really want to make their jobs easier, start having them tell YOU what they want, or better yet, get someone who's written production code recently to be part of the group.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Electronic Medical Records: The Healthcare Information Experts Weigh In

Crossed my desk this morning while giving the CDA/CCD presentation for HL7.  This was a really good discussion two weeks ago, which lead to the creation of the ePatient Rap.  I'm glad to be continuing it...



Thursday 9/16: We heard from these four healthcare information professionals two weeks ago at a breakfast meeting and thought you would enjoy hearing their perspectives on what is happening with medical records adoption. They will share professional and personal experiences that will underscore the challenges. Larry Chait will moderate and the audience will be encouraged to join in with questions. The focus is on what it will take to encourage personal participation in electronic medical records management. We all have a stake in the outcome!

Electronic Medical Records: The Healthcare Information Experts Weigh In

Thursday, September 16, 2010, 4:00 - 6:00 p.m., Microsoft, 201 Jones Rd., Sixth Floor, Waltham, MA 02451. Directions.

Panelists: Elaine Alligood (VA Technology Assessment), Dan Bogaty (Partners Healthcare), Keith Boone (GE Healthcare), and Janice McCallum (Health Content Advisors)

Details: http://kmforum.org/blog/?p=792

Registration Form for Thursday: http://s94896443.onlinehome.us/tinc?key=t0p0UHsg&formname=reg_thursday

Registration Comments (Cost, time, meeting format): http://kmforum.org/blog/?page_id=22

The Healthcare Standards Interconnections

Somebody recently asked me for information about collaborations between the different standards organizations and gave me a spreadsheet they had started.  Well, a spreadsheet might be a good way to gather this data, but it wasn't the best for visualization.  I spent about half a day putting together something that I think works based on a very small data set based on what I knew and could find out quickly.  It really works out to two tables:

Organizations
SDO/Profiling Organization   Type of Organization   URL

Types of organizations include SDOs like HL7 and IHTSDO, Profiling Organizations like Continua and IHE, and could include other kinds of organizations like government agencencies and medical professional societies, but I skipped these latter two.  The problem is already pretty complex.  I did separate Vocabulary from other sorts of SDOs, and general rather than healthcare specific SDOs.

Relationships
Source   Destination  Relationship Type  Relationship Description   URL

Relationship types included governance (like JIC or the SCO Summit), joint work products/ballots, MOUs and Collaborations, Memberships of one organization to another, or liaison relationships of one organization with another.

The best visualization I've been able to come up with is using FDP with GraphViz.  FDP uses a node placement strategy based on weights associated with edges between nodes.  It then minimizes the energy or force exerted in the graph.  I'd love to have added an image map with this, but it seems my version of GraphViz generates empty maps.  This was a brief side project so I haven't tracked it down, but you can if you want.  The source file for the image below is on Google Docs using the DOT Langauge.

Color Key
Profiling Organizations are in brown ovals.
Healthcare SDOs are in black ovals.
Healthcare Vocabulary SDOs are in cyan ovals.
General IT SDOs are in magenta ovals.

Red arrows are Joint work products.
Blue arrows are MOUs.
Green arrows are Memberships.
Purple arrows are Liaison Relationships.
Yellow connections are between SCO Summit Organizations
Orange connections are between JIC Organizations

Visualization

This graph shows one view of the community, and a pretty well connected one at that. But I'm still missing a LOT of data (this is really about a four-week long research project with direct contacts to each SDO).  I know there are relationships I don't know about and don't even know how to find.  I've also pruned the graph some.  I have omitted two treaty organizations (IEC and ITU) and a few other SDOs because they had only one other connection.

I also have NOT dealt with use of standards across these workgroups (e.g., IHE use of HL7 CDA or DICOM WADO, or HL7 use of W3C XML, et cetera).  That would be an even bigger data set to gather, and would put IHE, Continua, W3C and IETF right in the middle of all the action.

If you like, download the data file, add your own connections, and play around.  GraphViz is pretty easy to use.

What you DO NOT see on this graph are the connections made because of the people involved. Cross membership of individuals would overwhelm this simple diagram. But in many cases, it's that same cross membership of key individuals that brings SNOMED CT or LOINC expertise into IHE or HL7, or NEMSIS to HL7, or ...

Cross leadership is probably something worth figuring out (but not on my time). Cochairs of IHE Committees are often cochairs of DICOM committees or HL7 workgroups, or leaders of ISO TC 215 workgroups or ASTM committees or ... and visa versa.

There's also a few very strong connectors in that cloud above worth identifying. They are pure gold mines of information (I aspire to be one of them someday).

It was the people more than anything else that ensured that IHE, HITSP and HL7 coordination was as good as it was.  I can even point to a perfect example, because that individual was the recipient of the first Ad Hoc Harley, and he made sure that the three organizations stayed connected.
As I think about it, looking at the graph above, what it tells me is that I don't need one more place to go to deal with standards and harmonization.  I need a couple fewer.  I need a place where I can work on several of these activities at the same time, with the ideal being that I'm just working on one thing at that time.  I'll say it again, I'd love to see something like the Canadian model here.

Monday, September 13, 2010

IHE IT Infrastructure Technical Framework Supplement Published for Public Comment


IHE - Changing the Way Healthcare Connects
IHE Community,

IT Infrastructure Technical Framework Supplement Published for Public Comment

The IHE IT Infrastructure Technical Committee has published the following supplement to the IHE IT Infrastructure Technical Framework for Public Comment:
  • XCPD Deferred Response (XCPD support for two-way messaging)
The document is available for download at http://www.ihe.net/Technical_Framework/public_comment.cfm.  Comments should be submitted by October 10, 2010 to the online forums at http://forums.rsna.org/forumdisplay.php?f=198.