Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup STAGE 3 Meaningful Use & 2015 VDT Certification NPRM Review Christine Bechtel, chair April 20, 2015.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Connecticut Ave NW, Washington, DC Understanding Patient Engagement in Stage 2 MU: Direct, HIPAA, VDT, and Patient Engagement.

Advertisements

Understanding Meaningful Use Presented by: Allison Bryan MS, CHES December 7, 2012 Purdue Research Foundation 2012 Review of Stage 1 and Stage 2.

Recommendations on Certification of EHR Modules HIT Standards Committee Privacy and Security Workgroup April 11, 2014.

Implementing the American Reinvestment & Recovery Act of 2009.

Meeting Stage 1 Meaningful Use Criterion Carlos A. Leyva, Esq. Digital Business Law Group, P.A.

Slide 1 Regional Care Collaborative March 26, 2015.

Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup December 2, 2013.

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup MU STAGE 3 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) Comments Christine Bechtel, chair May 12, 2015.

Interoperability and Health Information Exchange Workgroup April 17, 2015 Micky Tripathi, chair Chris Lehmann, co-chair.

Data Update Health IT Standards Committee Meeting March 18, 2015.

CMS NPRM proposes requirements for Stage 3 of EHR Incentive Programs (in FR March 30, 2015) In conjunction with.

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup Christine Bechtel, chair February 10, 2015.

Electronic Health Records – Meaningful Use, Certification, and the Regulatory Rulemaking Process June 18, 2015 Lori Mihalich-Levin,JD

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup STAGE 3 Meaningful Use Objective 6: Coordination of Care Through Patient Engagement Christine Bechtel, chair.

Discussion of 2015 Ed. NPRM Certification/Adoption Workgroup HIT Policy Committee April 2, 2014.

HIT Policy Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Chair George Hripcsak, Columbia University, Co- Chair December 13,

Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs

August 12, Meaningful Use *** UDOH Informatics Brown Bag Robert T Rolfs, MD, MPH.

Moderator Kevin Larsen, MD Medical Director, Meaningful Use Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology Washington, D.C. Using.

A First Look at Meaningful Use Stage 2 John D. Halamka MD.

Meaningful Use Stage 2 Esthee Van Staden September 2014.

Meaningful Use Personal Pace Education Module: Transitions of Care.

HIT Policy Committee Accountable Care Workgroup – Kickoff Meeting May 17, :00 – 2:00 PM Eastern.

DRAFT Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup October 28, 2013.

HIT Policy Committee Consumer Empowerment Workgroup August 21, :00-11:00AM Eastern.

Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 2 - Engaging Patients and Families June 17, 2013 Christine Bechtel, Subgroup Chair Paul Tang, MU WG Chair 1.

A First Look at Meaningful Use Stage 2 John D. Halamka MD.

CMS Proposed Changes for Meaningful Use in Mark Segal, Vice President, Government and Industry Affairs, GE Healthcare IT May 1, 2015.

HIT Standards Committee Consumer Technology Workgroup – Kickoff Meeting March 21, :00 AM– 12:00 PM Eastern.

Medicaid EHR Incentive Program For Eligible Professionals Overview of the Proposed 2015 Modification Rule Kim Davis-Allen Outreach Coordinator

Meaningful Use Elizabeth W. Woodcock, MBA, FACMPE, CPC Update: 2015 Sponsored by.

HIT Policy Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup Proposed Recommendations on MU Notice of Proposed Rule Making Paul Tang, Chair Palo Alto Medical Foundation.

Medicaid EHR Incentive Program Meaningful Use: Patient Engagement Kim Davis-Allen, Outreach Coordinator

Affordable Healthcare IT Solutions. MU RX Compliance with Meaningful Use Stage 2.

Patient Engagement Some of the events that will shape your definition. 1.Meaningful Use – strong emphasis on patient engagement w Stage 2 MU 2.Growth.

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup Interoperability Roadmap Comments Christine Bechtel, chair April 7, 2015.

Stage 3 Draft Recommendations Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup March 18, 2014.

HIT Policy Committee Consumer Empowerment Workgroup – Kickoff Meeting March 19, :00 – 4:00 PM Eastern.

Component 11: Configuring EHRs Unit 2: Meaningful Use of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) Lecture 1 This material was developed by Oregon Health & Science.

Unit 1b: Health Care Quality and Meaningful Use Introduction to QI and HIT This material was developed by Johns Hopkins University, funded by the Department.

1 Meaningful Use Stage 2 The Value of Performance Benchmarking.

DRAFT Paul Tang, Chair George Hripcsak, Co-Chair Meaningful Use Workgroup October 24, 2013.

Larry Wolf Certification / Adoption Workgroup May 13th, 2014.

Component 11/Unit 2a Meaningful Use of the Electronic Health Record (EHR)

Information Exchange Workgroup Recommendations to HIT Policy Committee October 3, 2012 Micky Tripathi, Larry Garber.

HIT Standards Committee Consumer Technology Workgroup April 18, :00 AM– 10:00 AM Eastern.

Meaningful Use: Stage 2 Changes An overall simplification of the program aligned to the overarching goals of sustainability as discussed in the Stage.

HIT Policy Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup Update Paul Tang Palo Alto Medical Foundation George Hripcsak Columbia University January 13, 2010.

CMS Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs Final Rule Overview 1 Robert Anthony.

HITPC - Information Exchange Work Group Meaningful Use Stage 3 Subgroup 2: Care Coordination and Patient and Family Engagement Co-Chairs: Jeff Donnell.

HIT Policy Committee Consumer Empowerment Workgroup September 26, :00 -11:00AM Eastern.

Interoperability and Health Information Exchange Workgroup April 24, 2015 Micky Tripathi, chair Chris Lehmann, co-chair.

Creating an Interoperable Learning Health System for a Healthy Nation Jon White, M.D. Acting Deputy National Coordinator Office of the National Coordinator.

HIT Standards Committee Meaningful Use Workgroup Update Paul Tang, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Chair George Hripcsak, Columbia University, Co- Chair.

HIT Standards Committee Privacy and Security Workgroup Standards and Certification Requirements for Certified EHR Modules Dixie Baker, Chair Walter Suarez,

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup Christine Bechtel, chair Neil Calman, co-chair December 8, 2014.

HIT Policy Committee Consumer Empowerment Workgroup June 17, :00 -5:00PM Eastern.

Meaningful Use Workgroup Subgroup 2 - Engaging Patients and Families Christine Bechtel, Subgroup Chair Paul Tang, MU WG Chair July 2,

By: Rebecca Cameron Amie Dennis Amy Everson Debborah Stokes.

Meaningful Use and PQRS How to help your practices avoid penalties April 25 th,2015 Washington D.C. Mark Norris Medical Records Services, LLC

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup STAGE 3 Meaningful Use & 2015 VDT Certification NPRM Review Christine Bechtel, chair April 28, 2015.

HIT Policy Committee Health Information Exchange Workgroup Comments on Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) and Interim Final Rule (IFR) Deven McGraw,

Meaningful Use Update 2015: How Does It Impact Family Medicine? Ryan Mullins, MD, CPE, CPHQ, CPHIT.

Modified Stage 2 Meaningful Use: Objective #8 – Patient Electronic Access Massachusetts Medicaid EHR Incentive Payment Program July 19, 2016 Today’s presenter:

The Value of Performance Benchmarking

EHR Incentive Program 2018 Program Requirements

2017 Modified Stage 2 Meaningful Use Objectives Overview Massachusetts Medicaid EHR Incentive Program September 19 & 20, 2017 September 19,

An Overview of Meaningful Use Proposed Rules in 2015

Biosurveillance and the National Health IT Agenda

Presentation transcript:

Draft – discussion only Consumer Workgroup STAGE 3 Meaningful Use & 2015 VDT Certification NPRM Review Christine Bechtel, chair April 20, 2015

Consumer Workgroup Members Christine Bechtel, Bechtel Health Advisory Group (Chair) Dana Alexander, Caradigm Leslie Kelly Hall, Healthwise Ivor Horn, Seattle Children’s Erin Mackay, National Partnership for Women & Families Philip Marshall, Conversa Health Amy Berman/Wally Patarawan, The John A. Hartford Foundation Will Rice, Walgreens/Take Care Health Systems Clarke Ross, Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities; American Association on Health and Disability Luis Belen, National Health IT Collaborative for the Underserved Kim Schofield, Lupus Foundation of America (GA Chapter) Program for CDC MaryAnne Sterling, Patient & Caregiver Advocate Nicholas Terry, Indiana University, Robert H. McKinney School of Law Ex Officio Members Cynthia Baur, HHS, CDC Teresa Zayas Caban, HHS, AHRQ Danielle Tarino, HHS, SAMHSA Theresa Hancock, Veterans Affairs Bradford Hesse, HHS, NIH Wendy J. Nilsen, HHS, NIH ONC Staff Chitra Mohla, Office of Policy (Lead WG Staff) 2

3 Agenda I.Workgroup Charge II.Review Objective 5 of Stage 3 of the Medicare & Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program III.Review VDT certification criteria in the 2015 Certification NPRM

Consumer Workgroup Charge Provide input and make recommendations on policy issues or opportunities to use health IT to: – Engage consumers and families in their own health and health care – Enable consumer-provider partnerships supported by health IT – Elevate consumer voices to shape health system transformation 4

Objective 5: Patient Electronic Access to Health Information 5 Objective: Provide electronic or API access to health information and educational resources. Must meet all measures. MEASURE 1: For > 80% of unique patients, patient provided access to health information within 24 hours of availability 1)Using patient portal 2)Using an ONC-certified API used by 3 rd party app or device MEASURE 2: Use CEHRT to identify patient-specific educational resources & provide electronic access to those material >35% of unique patients Exclusion: EP with no office visits. EP/EH in area with insufficient broadband

Proposed Measure 1 6 MEASURE 1: For > 80% of unique patients, patient provided access to health information within 24 hours of availability To calculate the percentage To calculate the percentage: DenominatorThe number of unique patients seen by the EP or the number of unique patients discharged from an eligible hospital or CAH inpatient or emergency department (POS 21 or 23) during the EHR reporting period. NumeratorThe number of patients in the denominator who are provided access to information within 24 hours of its availability to the EP or eligible hospital/CAH. ThresholdThe resulting percentage must be more than 80 percent in order for a provider to meet this measure. ExclusionAn EP may exclude from the measure if they have no office visits during the reporting period

Request for Comment What additional requirements might be needed to ensure that if the eligible hospital, CAH or EP selects the API option— 1.the functionality supports a patient’s right to have his or her protected health sent directly to a third party designated by the patient; and 2.Patients have at least the same access to and use of their health information that they have under view, download and transmit option. 7

Request for Comment on Exclusion Comment on Exclusion 1. Whether an exclusion is still appropriate for providers located in counties with <50% of housing having 4Mbps broadband 2. Whether to create exclusion for EPs having no office visits 8

Request for Comment on Alternates to Proposed Measure 1 Proposed: Patient or patient authorized representative is provided access to view online and transmit their health within 24 hours of availability to the provider; or the patient or patient authorized representative is provided access to an ONC-certified API that can be used by third- party applications or devices to provide access to their health information within 24 hours Alternate A Patient or patient authorized representative is provided access to view online and transmit their health within 24 hours of availability to the provider; and the patient or patient authorized representative is provided access to an ONC-certified API that can be used by third- party applications or devices to provide access to their health information within 24 hours Alternate B Patient and patient authorized representative is provided access to view online and transmit their health within 24 hours of availability to the provider; or the patient or patient authorized representative is provided access to an ONC-certified API that can be used by third- party applications or devices to provide access to their health information within 24 hours Alternate C the patient or patient authorized representative is provided access to an ONC-certified API that can be used by third- party applications or devices to provide access to their health information within 24 hours 9 For > 80% of all unique patients seen by EP or discharged from EH, CAH inpatient or ER

Request for Comment on Alternate Proposals Providers to Meet Measure 1 (pp ) Current VDT functions are widely in use and represent current standards for patient access. 1. Alternate A would require both functions to be available instead of allowing the provider to choose between the two; 2. Alternate B would require the provider to choose to have either both functions, or just an API function; and 3. Alternate C would require the provider to only have the API function. For Alternate C, the use of a separate view, download, and transmit function would be entirely at the provider's discretion and not included as part of the definition of meaningful use. Questions: - Whether these two technologies (portal and API) be optional or both required - If API is required, should still be required to offer a portal? - Problems with measuring patient access using an API rather than a portal? 10

Patient-Specific Education Materials MEASURE 2: Use CEHRT to identify patient-specific educational resources & provide electronic access to those material >35% of unique patients (Stage 2 was 10%) 11 To calculate percentage: DenominatorThe number of unique patients seen by the EP or the number of unique patients discharged from an EH or CAH inpatient or ED during EHR Reporting period NumeratorThe number of patients in the denominator who were provided electronic access to patient-specific educational resources using clinically relevant information identified by the CEHRT ThresholdThe resulting percentage must be more than 35% in order for the provider to meet the measure ExclusionsAn EP may exclude from the measure if they have no office visits during the EHR reporting period

2015 Edition Proposed Rule Health IT Certification Criteria Review VDT certification criteria in 2015 Certification NPRM ( Reference VDT certification document) Addressing Health Disparities 12

2015 Edition Proposed Rule: Addressing Health Disparities 13 Proposed Certification CriteriaWhat the Functionality Can Support Documentation of social, psychological, and behavioral data (e.g., education level, stress, depression, alcohol use, sexual orientation and gender identity) Allow providers and other stakeholders to better understand how these data can affect health, reduce disparities, and improve patient care and health equity Exchange of sensitive health information (data segmentation for privacy) Allow for the exchange of sensitive health information (e.g., behavioral health, substance abuse, genetic), in accordance with federal and state privacy laws, for more coordinated and efficient care across the continuum. Accessibility of health IT Compatibility of certified health IT with accessibility technology (e.g., JAWS text-to- speech application) More transparency on the accessibility standards used in developing health IT More granular recording and exchange of patient race and ethnicity Allow providers to better understand health disparities based on race and ethnicity, and improve patient care and health equity.

14 PUBLIC COMMENT