Meaningful Use We Have the Name But Now for Some Standards? Let’s try Meaningful Algorithms Instead
Posted Mar 01 2010 1:45pm
We seem to forget that technology throws us a new left curve every day when we wake up so this issue could go on forever. The pace at which we live and make decisions and multi-task today keep interfering here. When folks usually don’t quite know what to do, they start a “specific” blog to get feedback. Well all those who offer feedback get that left curve every day too, so guess what, we have even more alternatives to ponder.
I just still affirm that if we had more folks in leadership roles that would “roll up their sleeves” and participate instead of subscribing to the “it’s for those guys over there” mindset, we could make some progress. So let’s say you get a good idea from one of these “idea” blogs. Well if it is recognized as good, the first thing we get is another blog to focus on this part of the issue, and many want to make sure they get full recognition for the idea so get it out there on a blog:) Next we get idea #2 that is good and guess what, another blog and then, the 2 blogs start competing with opinions. The very first blog that spurred these other 2 gets ignored now because it’s no longer interesting and the 2nd 2 blogs are duking it out, providing cheap entertainment, but no answers. That is my opinion on what goes on to a degree from where I see so much of this.
By the time anyone gets back to the very first blog, we have at least a dozen new elements of technology that have become available, so it’s no longer applicable, but another blogger not even associated with any of the first 3 has a new site! The name “meaningful use” sounds good, but will anyone be able to define it for more than 24 hours at a time, don’t think so; however if we had meaningful “algorithms” now we have something, some code that does something and can be built upon that will work 24/7 and the format can be demonstrated with visuals, in other words run the software or code. With the software comes the hardware that creates solutions so without meaningful algorithms, the hardware doesn’t do much.
I have said for the last 2 years we need “algorithmic centric” laws, but to get there we need some smart folks that understand the concept, in other words some “smart people’. Again with an algorithm, you can run it, visually see the results and determine if it is in fact going to be “meaningful” and not just a new truckload of text to frustrate everyone. Certainly there needs to be some text too, but this is getting to be insidious.
One other part of the problem as mentioned above are the non participants who think this is “for those guys over there”. Healthcare is for everyone as well as a bit of the available technology that comes with it today. We need to get everyone involved and help stamp out “Magpie Healthcare” as those who only repeat do not carry nearly the value as does one who has walked the walk and talked the talk. If more folks participated we probably would have half our answers as to why seniors do not participate in PHRs.
Next time you find a new blog, give this some thought, is this an original or a spin off for entertainment and debate purposes, is there any education value here? BD
At the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME) 2010 CIO forum held in Atlanta, GA, this week, participants in a town hall meeting made that clear as they discussed a variety of topics, from getting physicians to embrace technology, such as computerized physician order entry (CPOE), to the wisdom of telling your executive team that it must invest in technology to be eligible for stimulus funds under the HITECH provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which some fear will end up an unfunded mandate.
In a CHIME member survey released at the event, nearly 30% of respondents listed EHR upgrades or implementation as their biggest hurdle. And 41% listed it among their top three concerns. But culture, not systems, will hamper adoption, said panelist Paul Tang, MD, vice president and CIO of Palo Alto (CA) Medical Foundation, who is the vice chair of the HIT Policy Committee and chair of the Meaningful Use Work Group.
Why are physicians trying to make end runs around meaningful use requirements? There's no incentive for them to participate because the money goes to the hospitals, said one audience member. There are incentives for implementation—but none for usage. If hospitals are not going to pay for scribes or give incentives to physicians, why should they participate?