Comments on: Monday Morning Update 1/4/10 http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/ Healthcare IT News and Opinion Wed, 23 May 2012 12:45:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Linda http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/comment-page-1/#comment-7901 Linda Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:54:22 +0000 http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/#comment-7901 When you put together the Excel spreadsheet for meaningful use criteria, you have what appear to be additional items listed as 'a.b.c.' etc., such as for the smoking question criteria - current smoker, past smoker, never smoked. I do not find these detail items in the proposed rule. Where did you get the a. b. c. detail information from? When you put together the Excel spreadsheet for meaningful use criteria, you have what appear to be additional items listed as ‘a.b.c.’ etc., such as for the smoking question criteria – current smoker, past smoker, never smoked. I do not find these detail items in the proposed rule. Where did you get the a. b. c. detail information from?

]]> By: Adam K, pMDsoft Lead Software Developer http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/comment-page-1/#comment-7686 Adam K, pMDsoft Lead Software Developer Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:41:34 +0000 http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/#comment-7686 Anne Onymous wrote: >> For years, vendors charged a fortune for simple interfaces >> to the systems of other systems. Now, in order to get >> certified, they have to offer this interoperability. In >> addition, they may not be able to charge for it! Hallelujah! This has been a long time in coming. Medical software companies need to understand that interfaces aren't accessories or add-ons - they're actually part of the core functionality of the product. There's an article on Healthcare Musings that digs into this idea - that the interface is part of the product - in more depth. Companies that charge for interface work and that can't interface well are going to face some serious challenges in the months to come. Check it out: http://www.gibson-consultants.com/healthcare-musings-october-2009 Anne Onymous wrote:

>> For years, vendors charged a fortune for simple interfaces
>> to the systems of other systems. Now, in order to get
>> certified, they have to offer this interoperability. In
>> addition, they may not be able to charge for it!

Hallelujah! This has been a long time in coming. Medical software companies need to understand that interfaces aren’t accessories or add-ons – they’re actually part of the core functionality of the product.

There’s an article on Healthcare Musings that digs into this idea – that the interface is part of the product – in more depth. Companies that charge for interface work and that can’t interface well are going to face some serious challenges in the months to come. Check it out:

http://www.gibson-consultants.com/healthcare-musings-october-2009

]]> By: Unicorn Huntsman http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/comment-page-1/#comment-7655 Unicorn Huntsman Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:37:42 +0000 http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/#comment-7655 You are right on about the MU denominators Mr. H. Don't worry though, eventually there will be an iPhone app for estimating those numbers! You are right on about the MU denominators Mr. H. Don’t worry though, eventually there will be an iPhone app for estimating those numbers!

]]> By: DrGeorge http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/comment-page-1/#comment-7653 DrGeorge Mon, 04 Jan 2010 17:12:11 +0000 http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/#comment-7653 Loved your distillation of the Meaningful Use Criteria documents into a simple (?) spreadsheet. Reminds me of RFP's we used to respond to in the defense business. As in that industry, success in the healthcare records / analytics business will, I imagine, be heavily weighted to those firms who can apply cadres of professional analysts (i.e., marketeers) to demonstrate how their products meet the criteria bullet-by-bullet. I'd be curious to see, bullet-by-bullet, which of these criteria could be realigned to apply to consumers directly, with measures that have specific meaning to patients presenting with specific conditions. Or has the Consumer been overlooked? Loved your distillation of the Meaningful Use Criteria documents into a simple (?) spreadsheet. Reminds me of RFP’s we used to respond to in the defense business. As in that industry, success in the healthcare records / analytics business will, I imagine, be heavily weighted to those firms who can apply cadres of professional analysts (i.e., marketeers) to demonstrate how their products meet the criteria bullet-by-bullet. I’d be curious to see, bullet-by-bullet, which of these criteria could be realigned to apply to consumers directly, with measures that have specific meaning to patients presenting with specific conditions. Or has the Consumer been overlooked?

]]> By: soothsayer http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/comment-page-1/#comment-7652 soothsayer Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:24:58 +0000 http://histalk2.com/2010/01/02/monday-morning-update-1410/#comment-7652 In tele-icu care, the patient does not exist to the doctor at a distance. The computer is the patient. Sad. In tele-icu care, the patient does not exist to the doctor at a distance. The computer is the patient. Sad.

]]>