1 / 17

Comments and Feedback on HITPC Stage 3 Meaningful Use Proposed Objectives

This document outlines the comments and feedback from the Information Exchange Workgroup (IEWG) regarding Stage 3 of the Meaningful Use program. Key discussion points include the query for patient records, provider directory integration, data portability, and clinical decision support. Themes from the comments emphasize the need for a greater focus on clinical outcomes, innovation flexibility, and addressing interoperability challenges. The workgroup will review specific objectives in subsequent meetings, ensuring alignment with patient safety and quality measurement standards.

easter
Télécharger la présentation

Comments and Feedback on HITPC Stage 3 Meaningful Use Proposed Objectives

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HITPC Meaningful Use Stage 3 RFC Comments February 15, 2013 Information Exchange Workgroup Micky Tripathi

  2. Agenda • Approach • Timeline • Overview of comments

  3. Approach • Primary on: • IEWG 101 Query for Patient Record • IEWG 102 Provider Directory • IEWG 103 Data Portability • MU05 HIT Innovation • Providing input to MU WG on: • SGRP 113 Clinical Decision Support (input on prior authorization language for proposed future stage) • SGRP 303 Summary of Care • SGRP 308 Notification of a Health Event

  4. Approach • Deep dive on the comments and then determine if any adjustments to the objective or criterion are needed. • MU WG timeline and approach

  5. Tentative IE Workgroup Timeline

  6. Comments • 606 Comments • Types of organizations that commented • Allied Professional Organization • EHR Consultant • Eligible Hospital • Eligible Professional • Federal Agencies • Other (e.g. REC community, individual citizens) • Payers • Provider Organization (Clinician) • Provider Organization (Institutional) • Consumer Organizations • Vendor (individual) • Vendor Trade Groups

  7. Overarching Themes from Comments • There should be a greater focus on clinical outcomes in Stage 3 • Empower flexibility to foster innovation, limiting the scope of recommendations • Concerns about timing • Experience needed from stage 2 before increasing thresholds, accelerating measures, or moving from menu to core • Concerns about the readiness of standards to support stage 3 goals • Address interoperability limitations • Meaningful Use is one component of provider responsibilities • Continue to invest in quality measurement alignment, infrastructure and standards • Ensure that patient safety remains a high priority and any related requirements are synchronized with Meaningful Use

  8. SGRP 113 Clinical Decision Support

  9. SGRP303 Summary of Care

  10. SGRP303 Summary of Care continued

  11. SRGP 308 Notification of Health Event (e.g. discharge from ED)

  12. IEWG 101 Query for Patient Record

  13. IEWG 101Query for Patient Record

  14. IEWG 102 Provider Directory

  15. IEWG 103 Data portability

  16. MU05

  17. Next Steps • On the next call the WG will review SGRP 113, 303, 308

More Related