Data Intermediaries and Meaningful Use: Quality Measure Innovation, Calculation and Reporting Recommendations from Data Intermediary Tiger Team.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Longitudinal Coordination of Care LTPAC SWG Monday August 19, 2013.
Advertisements

Quality Measures Vendor Tiger Team December 13, 2013.
Quality Measures Vendor Tiger Team January 30, 2014.
ELTSS Alignment to Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap DRAFT: For Stakeholder Consideration in response to public comment.
Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG)
Implementing the American Reinvestment & Recovery Act of 2009.
Qualified Clinical Data Registries April ATRA 2012 and Qualified Clinical Data Registries (QCDR) SATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION IN A QUALIFIED CLINICAL.
Clinical Quality Measures (CQMs) and Physician Privileging
Overview of Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Presentation to HIT Steering Committee May 24, 2012.
CMS NPRM proposes requirements for Stage 3 of EHR Incentive Programs (in FR March 30, 2015) In conjunction with.
Quality Measurement Task Force Summary Deck 2016 Inpatient Prospective Payment System June 15, 2015 Cheryl Damberg, Co-Chair Kathleen Blake, Co-Chair.
Connecting Health and Care for the Nation: A Shared Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap – DRAFT Version 1.0 Joint FACA Meeting Chartese February 10, 2015.
Meaningful Use, Standards and Certification Under HITECH—Implications for Public Health InfoLinks Community of Practice January 14, 2010 Bill Brand, MPH,
ONC Policy and Program Update Health IT Standards Committee Meeting July 17, 2013 Jodi Daniel Director, Office of Policy and Planning, ONC 0.
Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC) Certification Program June 19, 2013 Lauren Fifield, Policy Adviser, Practice Fusion.
Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs
August 12, Meaningful Use *** UDOH Informatics Brown Bag Robert T Rolfs, MD, MPH.
Qualified Clinical Data Registries a Data Intermediary Model May 20, 2013 Data Intermediary Tiger Team.
ONC Policy and Program Update Health IT Policy Committee Meeting July 9, 2013 Jodi Daniel Director, Office of Policy and Planning, ONC 0.
HIT Policy Committee Accountable Care Workgroup – Kickoff Meeting May 17, :00 – 2:00 PM Eastern.
Kevin Larsen MD Medical Director, Meaningful Use Office of the National Coordinator of Health IT Improving Outcomes with HIT ASCO Oct
Jesse C James, MD Quality Measures Workgroup Lead Quality Measures.
ONC Policy and Program Update Health IT Policy Committee Meeting January 14, 2014 Jodi Daniel, Director Office of Policy and Planning.
August 10, 2011 A Leading Provider of Consulting and Systems Engineering Services to Public Health Organizations.
OSEHRA Summit & PHA Activities Seong K. Mun, CEO May 13, 2015.
Quality Measurement Task Force 2016 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) July 21, 2015 Cheryl Damberg, Co-Chair Kathleen Blake, Co-Chair.
Meaningful Use: Clinical Quality Measures Dwane J. McGowan 18 th April, 2013.
Introduction to Public Health Informatics and their Applications August 27, 2015 Francis B Annor Georgia Department of Public Health.
Query Health Operations Workgroup HQMF & QRDA Query Format - Results Format February 9, :00am – 12:00am ET.
HIT Standards Committee Privacy and Security Workgroup: Initial Reactions Dixie Baker, SAIC Steven Findlay, Consumers Union June 23, 2009.
Larry Wolf, chair Marc Probst, co-chair Certification / Adoption Workgroup March 19, 2014.
The United States Health Information Knowledgebase: Federal/State Initiatives An AHRQ Research Project J. Michael Fitzmaurice, PhD, AHRQ Robin Barnes,
State HIE Program Chris Muir Program Manager for Western/Mid-western States.
Interoperability Framework Overview Health Information Technology (HIT) Standards Committee June 24, 2010 Presented by: Douglas Fridsma, MD, PhD Acting.
Jim Walker, MD Quality Measures Work Group CMIO, Geisinger Healthcare EHR Incentive Program Stage 3 Request for Comment: Approach and Questions October.
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.
10/27/111 Longitudinal Care Work Group (LCWG) Proposal to Re-Scope and Re-Name the LTPAC WG.
1 Meaningful Use Stage 2 The Value of Performance Benchmarking.
Draft – discussion only Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup June 23, 2015 Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair.
Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs Stage 2 Final Rule Travis Broome HIT Standards Committee
Clinical Quality Public Hearing June 7, 2012 HIT Standards & Policy Committees Summary: June 20, 2012 Marjorie Rallins, Clinical Quality WG, HIT Standards.
Meaningful Use and Merit Based Incentive Payment in 2019.
Larry Wolf Certification / Adoption Workgroup May 13th, 2014.
Health Information Technology EHR Meaningful Use Milestones for HIT Funding Michele Madison
Quality Measurement Task Force 2016 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) August 11, 2015 Cheryl Damberg, Co-Chair Kathleen Blake, Co-Chair.
HIT Standards Committee Overview and Progress Report March 17, 2010.
Meaningful Use: Stage 2 Changes An overall simplification of the program aligned to the overarching goals of sustainability as discussed in the Stage.
Health TechNet Presented by: Suniti Ponkshe October 8, 2010.
eCQM Affinity Group Session #3
Discussion - HITSC / HITPC Joint Meeting Transport & Security Standards Workgroup October 22, 2014.
Creating an Interoperable Learning Health System for a Healthy Nation Jon White, M.D. Acting Deputy National Coordinator Office of the National Coordinator.
Electronic Clinical Quality Measures – Session #1 ONC Resource Center.
S&I FRAMEWORK PROPOSED INITIATIVE SUMMARIES Dr. Douglas Fridsma Office of Interoperability and Standards December 10, 2010.
Medicaid EHR Incentive Program Updates eHealth Services and Support September 24, 2014 Today’s presenter: Nicole Bennett, Provider Enrollment and Verification.
Final Rule Regarding EHR Certification Flexibility for 2014 Today’s presenters: Al Wroblewski, Client Services Relationship Manager Thomas Bennett, Client.
360Exchange (360X) Project 12/06/12. Reminders / announcements 360X Update CEHRT 2014 / MU2 Transition of Care Requirements 1 Agenda.
Quality Measures Workgroup Recommendations QUALITY MEASURE WORKGROUP RECOMMENDATIONS Mar 2, 2011.
ACWG Charge Make recommendations to the Health IT Policy Committee on how HHS policies and programs can advance the evolution of a health IT infrastructure.
Walter G. Suarez, MD, MPH – Kaiser Permanente Floyd Eisenberg, MD, MPH – iParsimony, LLC Co-Chairs, HL7 Clinical Quality Information Workgroup Presented.
Copyright Medical Group Management Association ® (MGMA ® ). All rights reserved. MACRA: Next steps toward value-based payment in Medicare.
QMWG Measures Framework Quality Measure Workgroup Report David Lansky Aug. 3, 2011.
Interoperability Measurement for the MACRA Section 106(b) ONC Briefing for HIT Policy and Standards Committee April 19, 2016.
HIT Policy Committee Health Information Exchange Workgroup Comments on Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) and Interim Final Rule (IFR) Deven McGraw,
Clinical Quality Measures (CQMs) Jason Werner Michigan Department of Health and Human Services.
The Value of Performance Benchmarking
MACRA and Physician Reimbursement
NCQA’s Approach to the New Quality Measurement Landscape
Introduction to the Quality Payment Program & MIPS
Modified Stage 2 Meaningful Use: Objective #2 – Clinical Decision Support Massachusetts Medicaid EHR Incentive Payment Program July 7, 2016 Today’s presenter:
Health IT Policy Committee Workgroup Evolution
Presentation transcript:

Data Intermediaries and Meaningful Use: Quality Measure Innovation, Calculation and Reporting Recommendations from Data Intermediary Tiger Team

Preamble In advance of Stage 3 of the EHR Incentive Program, the Health IT Policy Committee (HITPC) and the Quality Measures Work Group (QMWG) convened a subgroup, the Data Intermediary Tiger Team Charge DITT: “Specify the role and functions of intermediaries in e-measure reporting and feedback, including their role in measurement calculation, submission, data transformation, data governance, and bi-directional communications with providers/end users.” “Explore the current and desired future state of intermediaries...Consider which attributes of an intermediary are required to satisfy future state needs (privacy and security, assurance of data completeness /accuracy, etc.)" 1

Preamble In responses to the QMWG portion of the Request For Comment for Stage 3 Meaningful Use – Support for an Innovation Track for eCQMs in MU3 – Support for opening measure development to a more diverse set of entities – Support for using the standards in place to promote interoperability 2

eCQM Innovation Track QMWG 18 3

eCQM Innovation Track QMWG 19 4

eCQM Innovation Track QMWG 21 5

CMS RFI on Data Registries 2013 Reporting entity requirements for qualified registry under the PQRS for 2014 and subsequent years or the EHR Incentive Program – What types of entities should be eligible to submit quality measures data on behalf of eligible professionals for PQRS and the EHR Incentive Program? Examples might include medical board registries, specialty society registries, regional quality collaboratives or other entities. – What qualification requirements should be applicable to such entities? 6

DITT Tasks Contribute recommendations on Data Intermediaries related to: 1. Privacy and Security 2. Data quality (completeness, timeliness, etc) 3. CEHRT Standards alignment (consume/produce CCDA or QRDA Category 1) 5. Organization type/characteristics (e.g. registries, ACO, qualified entities, etc) 4. Measure Innovation 7

Guiding Principles for eMeasure Development (from QMWG) Encourage participation Maximize Interoperability and Standards Ensure Data Quality Support innovation in e-Measurement 8

Roles and Recommendations for Data Intermediaries Accept EHR Data for Clinical Quality Measure Calculation Short Term: DI will be certified to 2014 CEHRT and function as Certified EHR Modules. Will accept a Quality Reporting Document Architecture Category I (patient level data) consistent with ONC Standards & Certification Criteria for MU2 and will not add innovative measures to MU. Long term: For the sake of encouraging consistent implementation and calculation of MU CQMs, DI will accept quality data that conform to future standards (e.g. QRDA). To allow multi-source data capture, DI will also accept proprietary data reporting formats. Data intermediaries may have proprietary formats for transfer of multisource data for innovation path measures but those formats will not be required for EHR certification. 9

Roles and Recommendations for Data Intermediaries Ensure Quality of Data Transferred and Stored Short term: Require import and export testing for certification as in MU2. Long Term: Intermediaries attest that the data they report to HHS truthfully describe clinical care and are faithful to data received from providers. Long term: The attestations as above in addition to federal regulators or representatives will be responsible for random/periodic audits of intermediaries to prove compliance with entity data management plan and maintenance of data quality 10

Roles and Recommendations for Data Intermediaries Execute Patient/Provider Attribution Logic Short term: Intermediaries attribute patients to providers as specified in 2014 EHR Incentive Program CQM specification. Long term: Intermediaries may develop proprietary attribution logic but must disclose the attribution method employed to providers and federal stakeholders and attribution logic will be transparent to public. 11

Roles and Recommendations for Data Intermediaries Calculate Meaningful e-Clinical Quality Measures from EHR Data that Providers Use for MU Credit Short Term: Providers will only receive credit for measures that are part of the EHR Incentive Program. Long Term: There will be a minimal set of standardized quality measures that approximate the core measures for the EHR Incentive Program that all DIs will be certified to import data elements for, calculate and report to HHS via QRDA cat III (or appropriate data standard). Long Term: Intermediaries will be encouraged to develop proprietary measures and providers will receive credit for reporting on intermediary- developed measures via standard reporting document (e.g. QRDA cat III). Long Term: Require some review of proprietary/innovative measures that is less extensive than current requirements for national endorsement. 12

Roles and Recommendations for Data Intermediaries Calculate Meaningful e-Clinical Quality Measures from EHR Data that Providers Use for MU Credit Long Term: Limit innovative measures to those that conform to the criteria below: a.Specification expressed in unambiguous logic that conforms to Quality Data Model or future standard for eCQM and uses standardized value sets/logic consistent with others measures in EHR Incentive Program b.Measures are outcomes focused, or if a process measure is developed and tested, it must be submitted as part of a “suite” of measures which includes process measures that have close proximity to a desired outcome measure. c.Address one or more NQS domains that are high priority or have gaps in EHR Incentive program (e.g. care coordination, patient engagement, etc). d.Innovative measures should use multi-source data (claims, patient reported outcomes, financial, etc). e. Providers that participate in MU and use core and innovative measures will receive credit for quality reporting across multiple programs as appropriate (PQRS, MU, VBM, etc). 13

Roles and Recommendations for Data Intermediaries Report To Public – Short Term: No reporting of MU eCQM scores to public. – Long Term: Public report requirements will mimic the reporting required by HHS for MU. Innovative measure data should eventually be visible to public. Report to HHS – Short Term: Consistent with current certification criteria, intermediaries that are certified HIT modules will report on MU2 measures via QRDA category 3 aggregate report. – Long Term: Requirement for reporting to HHS for innovative measures should mimic those for the legacy MU measures. Report Data To Providers – Short Term: Intermediaries will be expected to create reports on performance score to providers. – Long Term: Intermediaries will be required to create reports on performance scores, benchmarking and data quality (e.g. rates of data errors) to providers. 14

Conservative Framework Payers CEHRT Intermediaries Conservative Framework QRDA Cat 1 QRDA Cat 3 15

Alternative Framework Payers CEHRT + Multi-Source Data Intermediaries Alternative Framework Claims CEHRT PRO Misc Clinical Data 16