Case Study: Developing an EMR Implementation Schedule at UVA Health System Paul Dreyer VA HIMSS Student Liaison.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Management of Engineers and Technology Strategic Planning Group Processes.
Advertisements

Chronic disease self management – a systematic review of proactive telephone applications Carly Muller Dean Schillinger Division of General Internal Medicine.
Long Term Care Provider Associations Meeting Sharon White CMS – Region V August 22, 2007 F314 – Pressure Ulcers.
February 1, 2006Center for Economic Services Health Information Technology and the Transformation of Care Delivery California Council on Science and Technology.
Presentation to ProModel Solutions Conference. INTRODUCING.
Module 11: Community TB Care Image source: Pierre Virot, World Lung Foundation.
What is this course? This course is designed to provide a basic awareness and understanding of ICD-10 and why it is so critical to our organization.
MIS 2000 Class 20 System Development Process Updated 2014.
OVERVIEW OF ClASS METHODS and ACTIVITIES. Session Objectives By the end of the session, participants will be able to: Describe ClASS team composition.
1 The aim…. ‘to enable assessors to objectively assess a laboratory’s compliance with the new standards’
Lecture 8 Selecting a Healthcare Information System (Chapter 8)
Mount Auburn Hospital / MAPS / MACIPA One IS Journey to an Integrated Database October
Chapter 8 Information Systems Development & Acquisition
Chapter 8 The Information Systems Planning Process Meeting the Challenges of Information Systems Planning Charles Cohen Presented by: Pablo De Luca.
Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0214/Audit Sistem Informasi Tahun: 2007.
System Implementation
Managing the Information Technology Resource Course Introduction.
Hospital Patient Safety Initiatives: Discharge Planning
Lecture 3 Strategic Planning for IT Projects (Chapter 7)
ICD-10 IMPLEMENTATION – ARE YOU WHERE YOU NEED TO BE? Maureen Doherty, CPC, CPC-H EisnerAmper Healthcare Services Group June 2012.
REAL-START : Risk Evaluation of Autism in Latinos (Screening Tools and Referral Training) Assuring No Child Enters Kindergarten With an Undetected Developmental.
What is Business Analysis Planning & Monitoring?
Implementation of Enterprise Wide Speech Recognition, Text-based Documentation and Automated Document Distribution May 27, 2013 Michelle Leafloor.
The Training Needs of University Sustainability Managers David DuBois, PhD The Social Design Group Cathy DuBois, PhD Kent State University Presented at.
MAST: the organisational aspects Lise Kvistgaard Odense University Hospital Denmark Berlin, May 2010.
ICD-10 Staff Awareness. WHAT IS THIS COURSE? This course is designed to provide a basic awareness and understanding of ICD-10 and why it is so critical.
Leapfrog Hospital Rewards Program™: Implementation Options Catherine Eikel February 6, 2006.
TOBACCO CONTROL INITIATIVE HCSD Disease Management Program Quarterly Meeting April 26, 2005 Sarah Moody Thomas, PhD Statewide Clinical Lead.
Steps for Success in EHR Planning Bill French, VP eHealth Strategies Wisconsin Office of Rural Health HIT Implementation Workshop Stevens Point, WI August.
Evaluating Investments in Information Technology Shannon Crump December 9, 2002 ISM 6021.
EConsult Requirements for Health Plans John D. Nowacek Web Business Development Manager Optima Health Virginia Beach, VA June 28, 2005.
SETMA Provider Training October 19, One of the catch phrases to medical home is that care is coordinated. At SETMA it means more than just coordinating.
Presented By: Emergency Management Professionals Dee Grimm RN, JD MUTAL AID AGREEEMENTS FOR HOSPITAL EVACUATION.
Handbook of Informatics for Nurses and Healthcare Professionals Copyright ©2009 by Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey All rights.
Copyright 2012 Delmar, a part of Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. Chapter 9 Improving Quality in Health Care Organizations.
Component 8 Installation and Maintenance of Health IT Systems Unit 11 Pilot Testing and Full-Scale Deployment This material was developed by Duke University,
Unit 8.3: Go-Live Support Strategies HIT Implementation Planning for Quality and Safety Component 12/Unit 81 Health IT Workforce Curriculum Version 1.0/Fall.
Oregon Benefits Online Scope to System Comparison 1.
Software Architecture Evaluation Methodologies Presented By: Anthony Register.
On the CUSP: STOP BSI Improving Situational Awareness by Conducting a Morning Briefing.
Adoption and Use of Electronic Medical Records (in Federally Qualified Health Centers) and Supporting an ASP Community Care Network of Virginia, Inc.
This material was developed by Oregon Health & Science University, funded by the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the National Coordinator.
On the CUSP: STOP BSI Improving Situational Awareness by Conducting a Morning Briefing.
Ty Cobb Regional Medical Center Reducing Readmissions.
HIPAA Summit Practical Approaches to Sticky Payer Issues April 26, 2002 Bob Perlitz, AVP, HIPAA Compliance Officer.
Healing Hospital North Shore, IL Vendor Selection for an Adverse Events Information System Imran Khan Project Manager Steven Stanford Chief Information.
California Department of Public Health / 1 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH Standards and Guidelines for Healthcare Surge during Emergencies How.
Kathleen Blake, MD, MPH January 15, 2016 What’s In a Certified Health IT Comparison Tool: Quality Improvement and Alternative Payment Capabilities.
PRE-PLANNING FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. OVERVIEW ASSESSING OWNER CAPABILITIES ANALYSIS OF RESOURCES REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWING.
Building Capacity for EMR Adoption and Data Utilization Among Safety Net Organizations Presented by Chatrian Reynolds, MPH, Evaluator, LPHI Shelina Foderingham,
Summary Projected Business Landscape Physician Employment's Role
NCAHRMM Spring conference
IS 455 Project Management – What is a project?
Migration to an Electronic Health Record System
Telehealth Survey Update.
BANKING INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Applying Business Process Re-engineering
Measuring Outcomes of GEO and GEOSS: A Proposed Framework for Performance Measurement and Evaluation Ed Washburn, US EPA.
2 Selecting a Healthcare Information System.
MOSH Leading Practices Adoption System
CLINICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM
Diffusion of Patient Safety and Performance Improvement across Cambridge Health Alliance: Starting the Journey Gouri Gupte PhD, MHA Director of Performance.
Auditing Compliance with the Privacy Rule
Define Your IT Strategy
Selecting a Health Care
{Project Name} Organizational Chart, Roles and Responsibilities
WORKSHOP Change Management Strategy TEMPLATE
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AB 1600 UPDATE
President and Chief Executive Officer
Chapter 2 Organizational Structure of Health Care Copyright © 2017, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Presentation transcript:

Case Study: Developing an EMR Implementation Schedule at UVA Health System Paul Dreyer VA HIMSS Student Liaison

An Implementation Plan Must Include: 1) Technology Sequencing (Focus) 2) Workflow Impact/Re-design 3) New/Updated Policies and Procedures 4) Go-Live Support 5) Post-Go-Live Support and Trouble Reporting

Sequencing Options 1) Big Bang = All systems / all users live at the same time Used Primarily for: Replacements of legacy systems OR Systems that primarily impact a single departmentUsed Primarily for: Replacements of legacy systems OR Systems that primarily impact a single department RISKS -RISKS - Extensive simultaneous effort and more user support neededExtensive simultaneous effort and more user support needed Training (large number at once)Training (large number at once) Delays effect a larger number of users and areasDelays effect a larger number of users and areas BENEFITS -BENEFITS - Speed (completed at once)Speed (completed at once) Less complexity in most casesLess complexity in most cases

Sequencing Options 2) Phased In Approach = One or two systems / users live at different times Used Primarily for: A health system/facility- wide systemUsed Primarily for: A health system/facility- wide system RISKS -RISKS - Increased complexityIncreased complexity Longer implementation timeframeLonger implementation timeframe Multiple departments with different workflowsMultiple departments with different workflows BENEFITS -BENEFITS - More controlled and better ability to focus support and sequence trainingMore controlled and better ability to focus support and sequence training Able to work out problems arising in the first departments/units before implementing the restAble to work out problems arising in the first departments/units before implementing the rest

Sequencing Options 3) Combination = Pilot a few units/ departments and then roll out (big-bang) Used Primarily for: New technology with a complicated implementation that needs to be first tested in a controlled environmentUsed Primarily for: New technology with a complicated implementation that needs to be first tested in a controlled environment RISKS -RISKS - Testing may not be adequately completed in the pilot units/departmentsTesting may not be adequately completed in the pilot units/departments Movement between pilot/non-pilot unit can be difficult for staff and patientsMovement between pilot/non-pilot unit can be difficult for staff and patients BENEFITS -BENEFITS - Issues with training, workflow, and hardware can be resolved and changed prior to full roll outIssues with training, workflow, and hardware can be resolved and changed prior to full roll out

Categories of Implementation Issues 1) Organizational Attributes of the organization or staff that will affect the implementation Attributes of the organization or staff that will affect the implementation 2) Technical IT implementation/connectivity/hardware issues that will affect the implementation IT implementation/connectivity/hardware issues that will affect the implementation 3) Financial The incremental financial costs/benefits that will be realized during and after implementation The incremental financial costs/benefits that will be realized during and after implementation

Development of an Implementation Sequence 1) Interviews with necessary managers and site visits - Interviewed 25 managers and the CFO (Yield = 60 Potential Criteria / Issues / Factors) 2) Identification of implications (impact on resources) for each criteria: - Selected criteria with the greatest implications that differentiate the clinics (Yield = 11 final non-financial criteria and appropriate financial criteria) 3) Interviews with members of management to confirm findings - General consensus on the final non-financial criteria 4) A survey was developed to calculate weights for each of the criteria, which was completed by 80% of the managers - Yield = a relative weighting scheme for all of the criteria

Development of an Implementation Sequence 5) Development of an evaluation methodology 6) An evaluation survey was developed for each manager to apply the criteria to their specific clinic, which provides a rating for each clinic on the final non-financial criteria - The rating combined with the afore mentioned weights are combined to determine an overall ranking for each clinic (Sum of the products of each criterias weight and rating)

Methodology 1) Clinic Criteria identify factors with the greatest implication on implementation, yielding differentiation among the clinics 2) Each Criteria includes: - A relative weight ( ) pertaining to the importance on implementation - A rating (0-100) of how pertinent the criteria is to an individual clinic Organizational Criteria completed by department/clinic manager Organizational Criteria completed by department/clinic manager Technical Criteria completed by IT managers and staff Technical Criteria completed by IT managers and staff Financial Criteria completed by IT department per Finance guideline Financial Criteria completed by IT department per Finance guideline 3) A final overall ranking will be determined for each clinic 4) Comparison of overall rankings to develop an implementation schedule

Non-Financial Criteria: 5 Organizational Criteria For UVAHS: 1: Clinic Size – Patient Volume: Patient safety benefits driven by visit volume 2: Opinion Leader: Internal sponsorship by a member of the clinical leadership 3: Patient Linked – Clinic: High referral volume with another clinic 4: Separate Chart: The amount of documentation in the clinic sent to HIS 5: Technology Acceptance: The ability of staff to accept and use technology

Non-Financial Criteria: 6 Technical Criteria For UVAHS: 1: Alternate Systems: Non-standard systems needing assimilation prior to implementation 2: Distance to Main Grounds: Distance in miles from the main hospital 3: Equivalent Clinic: The presence of clinics with the same medical specialty 4: Location Linked – Ancillary: Physical proximity / connection to an ancillary 5: Location Linked – Clinic: Physical proximity to another clinic 6: Unique Information: Unique data collection / documentation needs in a clinic

Financial Criteria: Simplified Cost-Benefit analysis for the duration of one year: Simplified Cost-Benefit analysis for the duration of one year: Costs = Hardware, training, tailoring, and support expensesCosts = Hardware, training, tailoring, and support expenses Benefits = $6 per patient visit (Source = 2003 ROI)Benefits = $6 per patient visit (Source = 2003 ROI) The financial benefits were analyzed and it was determined that the best representation of financial benefits would be visit volume and not revenue or profitability The financial benefits were analyzed and it was determined that the best representation of financial benefits would be visit volume and not revenue or profitability

What Would A Final Sequence Look Like?

Overall Process Step 1 = Step 1 = Interview end users and managers (organizational), IT staff (technical), and CFO (financial)Interview end users and managers (organizational), IT staff (technical), and CFO (financial) Step 2 = Step 2 = Develop criteria based on these interviews that will differentiate the different departments/unitsDevelop criteria based on these interviews that will differentiate the different departments/units Step 3 = Step 3 = Develop a weighting and ranking scheme for each final criteriaDevelop a weighting and ranking scheme for each final criteria Step 4 = Step 4 = Determine overall ranking for each department/unit and sequence the implementationDetermine overall ranking for each department/unit and sequence the implementation

Takeaways Provides an objective and thorough approach to sequencing the implementation of an IT project Provides an objective and thorough approach to sequencing the implementation of an IT project UVA and its clinics are different from other organizations: UVA and its clinics are different from other organizations: 1.Provider Based Clinics vs. Physician Based Clinics – Reimbursement 2.UVA already has a well developed IT infrastructure so these issues were not included 3.The UVA clinics are very diverse and geographically dispersed

Any Questions? Thank you - Barbara Baldwin: Chief Information Officer (UVAHS) Barry Wagner: Management Engineer (UVAHS)