Top News

UPMC’s Cerner systems go down for 14 hours at most campuses last Thursday and Friday, forcing them to go back to paper. The PR person blamed “a database bug,” which makes the above Oracle press release from this past summer a particularly fun read. Cerner and UPMC have an atypical vendor-customer relationship since they’ve invested big money together in innovation projects and UPMC runs a Cerner implementation business overseas.

From King Salmon: “Re: search. Is here a way to search HIStalk by keyword?” You can use the search box that’s in the right column. It’s not visible on mobile devices, though, in which case you can do a Google search by keyword, then click the gears icon at the upper right of the results screen (that’s where Google has moved the advanced search options, which used to come up on the main search screen.) Then, qualify your search down to the specific HIStalk site as shown above.

From Booth Boy: “Re: MEDITECH and Cerner. As I predicted, see the attached Las Vegas floor plan. Since they lost their HIMSS points by sitting out a few years, they are way back in the corner by the freight doors. If it’s cold on setup day, they’re going to freeze their butts off because the doors never close.” Just about every year I run the link to the rules of how HIMSS awards its much-coveted Exhibitor Priority Points, which rewards vendors who spend a lot with HIMSS by allowing them to buy bigger and better located booth space. Points can also be earned by buying sponsorships, booking hotel space through their housing company, signing up for corporate membership and paying your dues early, and buying services from HIMSS Analytics. Because they didn’t exhibit, MEDITECH is way down the list in the #727 spot (behind mostly companies you’ve never heard of and even some universities) and Cerner is at #429 (two notches below University of Alabama at Birmingham.) Needless to say, prime exhibit real estate isn’t happening for them this year, so you’ll need to seek them out.  

HIStalk Announcements and Requests

Inga’s taking a short break, so it’s just me (Mr. H) this time around.

Sales

The board of 125-bed Powell Valley Healthcare (WY) approves the purchase of NextGen EHR to replace its “dysfunctional” and old Healthland system, saying the hospital is getting a bargain because the company offered to drop $400K from the $2.65 million cost if the hospital signed by December 31. The hospital plans to collect $1.5 million in Meaningful Use incentives, which it says it could not have done with Healthland because, according to the IT manager, “The system we have now is not good. It’s terrible. It crashes. I can’t imagine being a nurse or a physician and working with it every day.” The money-losing hospital says buying a new clinical system probably means that other projects, such as needed renovations in surgery and the ED, may not get done, but a board member says the new system is even more important. “This is a have-to. We have to do this. I remember going into the lab a few years ago, and the lab girls were crying, and it was over Healthland (the current system). It needs to be replaced,”

People

Saint Francis Care (CT) names Linda Shanley as VP/CIO. She was previously with Stony Brook University Hospital.

Announcements and Implementations

Pikeville Medical Center (KY) goes live on Wellsoft’s EDIS, which is integrated with its McKesson applications.

Innovation and Research

An Ohio ED doctor develops NARx Check, which calculates a drug abuse “credit score” using Ohio’s prescription monitoring program data and alerts ED staff of patients likely to be abusing drugs. The application has generated positive comments from the state pharmacy board and local hospital association.

West Wireless Health Institute says that less than 1% of hospitals have deployed fully functional tablets, mostly because clinical systems vendors haven’t developed iPad-native apps, but also because wireless connectivity is spotty, iPads don’t fit into the pockets of standard-issue lab coats, and typing on an iPad is a pain when PCs are always close by anyway.

Other

The western regional chapters of HIMSS are putting on the one-day Women in Healthcare Information Technology Conference in San Francisco on Friday, January 20.

An insurance company sues the former COO of Christus St. Vincent Regional Medical Center (NM), trying to recoup the $3 million it reimbursed the hospital for fraud losses. The COO allegedly funneled hospital IT payments through corporations that were run by a woman with whom he was having a relationship. He supposedly even paid a part-time student to impersonate an engineer with the phony company when the hospital got suspicious. The hospital fired the COO for cause in early 2008 and says it’s still waiting for authorities to charge him with a crime.

Jacob Goldman, the former chief scientist of Xerox who created the famous Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) in 1970, died last week at 90. Xerox was happy making money from copy machines and didn’t commercialize PARC’s research, but those discoveries, such as the graphical user interface and ethernet, created the personal computer industry when further developed by Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, Adobe, Sun, and other fledgling Silicon Valley companies.

A new KLAS report says that while only 10-15% of hospitals use real-time location systems, 95% of those that do say they increased operational efficiency.

Several readers sent over a link to this article, in which another conservative publication takes some unfocused political shots at Epic’s Judy Faulkner using healthcare IT as its weapon of choice (actually, they aren’t new shots, just the same old ones recycled yet again for a new audience.) Her oft-recited transgressions:

• She donates to Democratic political candidates.
• She represents vendors on the Health IT Policy Committee.
• She’s anti-competition and anti-innovation, at least according to the unbiased opinion of Allscripts CEO Glen Tullman, an Epic competitor, quoted from an interview we did with him on HIStalk Practice (being a conservative publication, they had to be grasping to quote a long-time supporter and friend of President Obama who had a lot more influence than Judy Faulkner in getting billions in HITECH money included in the stimulus package.)
• She could have benefitted from politician meddling in which a group urged the VA to buy instead of build systems, mentioning as their argument successful clients that happen to be all Epic users. That’s true, but perhaps a fact worthy of inclusion is that the VA ignored the unsolicited advice and is sticking with its original plan to develop an open source replacement for VistA, so the net benefit to Epic was zero.
• Epic clients (Geisinger and Cleveland Clinic) were named by President Obama as being good technology users.
• Epic clients, like those of all vendors, have had some unrelated IT incidents that were listed.

The article concludes, predictably and with no facts whatsoever to back it up, that Epic is preventing patients from getting good care because of “partisan politics” (meaning beliefs that differ from the ones held by the authors.) You would think instead of just Googling up some old articles they could have turned up an actual expert in a hospital somewhere instead of just quoting a competitor’s CEO and a reporter. I’m a conservative more or less (fiscally, anyway) but this is just lazy political editorializing pretending to be reporting, indiscriminately throwing out loads of unrelated mud in the hopes it will stick to someone of a different political persuasion.

Surely someone could build a better case against Epic, although it’s probably hard to write around the inconvenient facts (its customers are among the best hospitals, they are voluntarily buying Epic given the other available options, and Epic tops every industry statistic by a mile, such as big-hospital sales, KLAS rankings, and hospital customers that have been awarded HIMSS EMRAM Stage 7.) Or maybe they can’t. The anonymous anti-Epic comments I get are almost always long on emotion and opinions and short on facts and first-hand knowledge (and they often come from the same handful of posters using different names, which makes me suspect that they are unhappy former Epic employees, spurned job-seekers, or employees of struggling competitors.) I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a negative comment about Epic from someone who actually uses it in a provider role, and I don’t recall hearing remorse from any of those users about losing the systems that Epic replaced. I get tired of writing positive things about Epic and keep hoping someone who’s actually in the game and not on the sidelines will provide an intelligent and convincing counterpoint to why they aren’t as great as the Kool-Aid drinkers say. I’m still waiting.

Sponsor Updates

• Weed Army Community Hospital (CA) chooses T-System for paper-based ED documentation.
• Salar suggests three New Year’s resolution in a blog posting.
• Nuance releases a case study on Emerson Hospital’s (MA) use of Nuance Transcription Services powered by eScription.
• Digital Prospectors Corp., which offers embedded systems engineering and healthcare information systems consulting services, is featured in Bloomberg Businessweek.
• Jeff Wasserman, VP of Culbert Healthcare Solutions, discusses physician employment opportunities, job culture, and interview skills in an American Medical News article.

Contacts

Mr. H, Inga, Dr. Jayne, Dr. Gregg.

 View/Print Text Only

Technology: The New Scapegoat?

I’ve always been a bit of a tech junkie. If I wasn’t afraid of revealing my age, I could tell some pretty good stories. To me, technology is exciting and invigorating, but also something to be respected. Technology at any level can run amok – think about Lucy in the chocolate factory as a basic example of what can go wrong. And who wants the artificial intelligence to run amok like HAL 9000? 

In conversations with providers, hospital administrators, and end users, the problem is always “the EHR” or “the system” or “the computer.”

Having lived in an electronic practice for nearly a decade and having used computers in the hospital for almost a decade before that, I can say with a good level of confidence that it’s not always the technology that’s at issue. Systems are only as good as the users who operate them, in conjunction with the training they receive and the proficiency they demonstrate. A recent situation at UC Irvine Medical Center illustrates this.

Although the headline screams “drug pump issue,” a close reading of the Statement of Deficiencies document (it begins on Page Five) yields some interesting factoids:

• The hospital deployed new infusion pumps without hospital-wide training.
• No policy and procedure document was developed (let alone approved) for the safe use of the new pumps.
• A physician overrode a “soft stop” alert on the pump, leading to a patient receiving a high dose of medication. (I agree that the fact that there wasn’t a “hard stop” alert programmed in, but let’s remember a physician did override the alert.)
• The hospital was “unable to ensure that MD… was competent in accurately programming the medication infusion pump.” The pump didn’t have a drug library and was programmed with a dose over 30 times that of the prescribed dose.

After two patient-related incidents, the hospital took corrective action, including:

• Only allowing trained RNs who have documented competency to program the pumps.
• Ensuring that dose, concentration, and flow rates are chosen from a current drug library appropriate to the care area.
• Restricting the ability for users to enter dose/rate for non-library medications unless a second user verifies the programming.
• Requiring re-verification of orders and programming when soft limits are overridden.
• Instituting hard stops which cannot be overridden for certain medication doses.
• Instituting independent double check for programming of pumps that deliver certain high-risk medications

These seem like no-brainer fixes to me. I’m glad the hospital put policies in place that should have been there all along (regardless of the newness of the brand of pump, model, etc., these are just good patient safety procedures).

The document goes on to list several other fairly horrifying behaviors, including a director of pharmacy who admitted knowing that no policies were in place and that no one was overseeing pump safety. “We will in the future, but the pharmacy department needs to be trained first.” He/she also stated that the vendor provided inadequate training for monitoring of pump-related events. Blaming the vendor is always easy – it takes a steadfast leader to halt a go-live when adequate training has not yet taken place.

Other scenarios mentioned in the document:

• A resident physician involved in a pump-related incident that involved infusing a medication over one hour instead of the recommended six hours was “unaware or unwilling to accept the hospital pharmacy directive to infuse the medication over six hours.” The resident’s anesthesia record stated that he was aware that he dosed the medication to infuse over one hour. The resident also violated Department of Anesthesia rules by not paging his attending physician to be present for the end of anesthesia as was required. Oh yeah – he also “overlooked” the patient’s low oxygen level and didn’t take corrective action. When the attending arrived after the resident finally paged, the attending called a Code Blue because the patient “had poor color and was not breathing.”
• Residents examining patients but not writing progress notes (even after a nursing supervisor notified the attending physician) on several occasions.
• An oncology staff nurse (whose job duties included validating chemotherapy doses) who was unable to calculate the dose when given a patient’s weight in pounds and a dose in milligrams per kilogram.
• Contract nurses allowed to operate infusion pumps without training (one with an ungraded proficiency exam in the personnel file — if you made him take it, why not grade it?)

I had to quit reading after a while because I’m extremely compulsive about patient safety and it was just making me increasingly agitated.

Despite the potential harm involved in the pump-related incidents, I’m actually glad they happened. Why? Because the incidents acted as a trigger to expose some significant issues and deficits in patient safety. Patient safety is a culture that requires education and support. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

I wouldn’t let an adolescent operate a lawn mower independently without appropriate training, safety gear, and close supervision. We don’t allow teenagers to drive cars (aka operate deadly weapons) without proving a minimum level of proficiency. Yet in this situation, users were allowed to operate equally dangerous machinery without training. The documentation doesn’t mention whether the nurses were forced to operate the pumps over their objections, but the point is they shouldn’t have been asked to use potentially lethal equipment they weren’t qualified (by training and demonstrated competency) to use.

I hope this case serves as a wake-up call for some institutions. I hope end users continue to speak up when they’re asked to do things that are unsafe and that someone listens. Lives depend on it.

E-mail Dr. Jayne.

 View/Print Text Only

Bobbie Byrne MD, MBA is VP/CIO of Edward Hospital, Naperville, IL.

Tell me about yourself and the hospital.

Edward is a really the quintessential community hospital. We have 400 beds over two hospitals, one of which is behavioral health, and we have an acute care hospital. It’s the backbone of Naperville, which is a suburb outside of Chicago. We are making efforts to move into tertiary care and trying to bring tertiary care into the community so that we don’t have to have our residents going to the downtown hospitals.

We’re really so typical. We’re in the middle of America, in the middle of the suburbs. What we’re doing, I think, is reflective of what a lot of other people are doing. 

I’m a pediatrician. My husband says I got hit in the head with a computer and I’ve never been the same. I was practicing and made the connection between quality of care and automation of care, and that if we were going to stay on paper, then we would never have any data to figure out what we were doing well and what we were doing poorly. Maybe 10 years ago, I ended up moving into IT on a part-time basis at the beginning, and then with increasing depth. It’s always been about, “Get it in the system so that we can measure it and track it and improve it.”

You just chose Epic. What is it about their story that’s making them dominate all the new sales?

A completely integrated record – inpatient, emergency, and ambulatory, clinical, and revenue cycle. They are the only company that offers this. It is exactly what our envisioning session showed us that Edward wanted. 

I shouldn’t say that they’re the only company that offers it. They’re the only company that offers it with strength in all of those product areas. Very often when you’re making a decision, there’s some department that thinks that they’re getting screwed, and they usually are. There usually is some really significant weakness in one section of the product from any of the other vendors. In Epic, there just isn’t. Everybody feels like they’re getting a best-of-breed product, but they’re getting the integrated product that the organization needs. The only compromise was on the price. [laughs] That was the only negative.

Are you expecting a hard-dollar return on investment, or is it just a leap of faith that there will some quality and strategic alignment benefits that will make it net out in the long run?

My sarcastic response is that when electricity came into the hospital, were people expecting a hard-dollar return on electricity? I don’t know if they were. I don’t think they were. To me, the electronic medical record is becoming a utility. It’s the, “What is the implication if we do not put this in?” as opposed to, “What’s our return on investment for installing it?” I think in the Chicago area, it could be seen as a competitive disadvantage to not have Epic.

I assume that Epic was a lot more expensive than … well, I shouldn’t assume that, but in a lot of cases they’re a lot more expensive than the systems you didn’t choose.

The actual check that we send to Epic is a very small percentage of our budget. The difference in price between Epic and the other vendors on the software cost is, I think, pretty small.

Cache’ is expensive. That’s a cost that the other vendors mostly do not have. But the difference is in the people and in the requirements for implementation and the recommendations around pulling people off of the floors, sending them to training, having them come full time to the project. That’s really where the big dollars are.

It makes me wonder that if you use the Epic staffing and methodology, would the other vendors be giving you the same kind of outcomes that Epic is getting? I mean, is it really the product? I do think it’s a superior product, but is it really the product or is it the entire implementation methodology that makes the difference and the incredible success of Epic customers?

You’re in an unusual position in that you saw Epic as a competitor when you were with Eclipsys and now you’re on the provider side and have chosen them as a vendor. From your two perspectives, are they invincible, and if you were a vendor again, what would you do to mount a challenge to Epic?

At that time I was at Eclipsys, Epic and Eclipsys were formidable competitors. There were certainly deals that Eclipsys won and deals that Epic won. At the beginning of my time at Eclipsys, Eclipsys won more. At the end of my time, Eclipsys won a lot less, so there was a progression there.

I would say that at this point the only way to beat Epic is to find prospects where they’re not looking for a comprehensive system. One patient, one record, one bill is what we were looking for. If you have somebody who’s got that enterprise vision, single source of truth, I don’t know how you could beat Epic.

There would be huge time lag in building a new system. Where does that leave the pie of business that Epic might want vs. how much they’re going to get? People keep saying, “Well, the pendulum will swing back, it always does.” But what would it swing back to?

When I first got to Edward, we had this combined system where we had MEDITECH on the inpatient side and Allscripts on the employed physician group. People would say, “Well, shouldn’t we buy Epic?“ just because all the hospitals around had bought Epic.

I said, you know, if we’re really going to do that, maybe we should really wait for some transformational technology. Maybe we should wait for a pure Web-based solution. We should be looking for that really disruptive technology. Maybe an EMR that’s so intuitive it requires no training or something like that. That’s really what I was thinking that the hospital enterprise system really needed.

Athenahealth in the physician office is a disruptive technology. They have a completely different business model and they do things very differently. They’re not a standard electronic medical record. If we could have something like that on the enterprise scale — not specifically their business model, but something that is just as disruptive. That was the thing I was thinking would be able to beat Epic. And it would be good for our industry, right, to have some fresh technology.

With healthcare reform and with the need to understand the patient across the continuum of care, it wouldn’t be prudent for us at Edward to sit here and wait for some theoretical disruptive technology to come forward. We have to run our business. We have to do what’s right based on what we have today.

I suppose it’s possible that Epic might be able to be the disruptive technology. Typically it would come from something outside of healthcare or from a new company emerging on the scene, but maybe Epic will be the one to be able to provide us with this next wave. I certainly think they probably would have a greater chance of doing that then anybody. Well, I shouldn’t say that …

You’ve going to have a lot money invested in staff training, salaries, and travel. You’ve written in the past about IT turnover. How will you create a culture that makes those expensive employees want to stay?

We actually have very low turnover, which is why when I have any, it’s a challenge. We are not always able to compete on salary, of course. I don’t think there’s any not-for-profit hospitals who can compete on salary all the time.

We have a really strong culture that has a very nice work-life balance. We tend to promote from within whenever possible so that individuals have a career path. We are increasing the number of career paths, so that people feel like when they complete the projects, that they would have the next step and they can see that somebody has gone ahead of them and advanced at Edward. We try and be really accommodating when people say, “I like to work on these types of projects versus these types of projects,” we try and adjust based on that.

It’s just a really nice place to work. People are very nice. Individuals really like their co-workers. 

Those are the kinds of things that we do. We of course have work from home and provide the tools through all of your standard electronic communication so that people can work from home or work from anywhere.

I don’t fear the turnover as much as some people do. We will have some, I know we will. But we’re also then going to have an opportunity to get other terrific people into the organization. In the proximity that we are, we also live in a really nice community, so people like to live here and they like to work here.

Epic, both as an employer and as a vendor, tends to like to bring people in who don’t have much IT background. They almost seem to have an anti-IT bias, working around IT instead of with them. Do you see that as a challenge?

I don’t know that we’re going to have as much of a challenge. I believe that our IT department is really integrated into the hospital. We don’t have a big “us–them” kind of issue with our operational owners. I’m sure there’s a little bit of that everywhere, but I think the idea that we’ve always had to have a physician – and it was important to Edward to have a physician in the CIO position, because they really wanted to make that this wasn’t — that we were very connected to the business and very connected to the clinical workflows. We have former accountants who have moved over and have come into IT and vice versa, so we’ve had some people who’ve been in IT and then moved back into the business piece of it. 

This was a decision that was not an IT decision. I mean, everybody says that about Epic. This really was a complete grassroots, bottom-up user decision to choose Epic, so right now, people are feeling really collaborative and feeling really close together.

The majority of our project is not being staffed by consultants or IT people. We’re pulling people off the floor, sending them to training, and then they will be full time on the project. We will end up during the project having fewer IT people working on it than we will users;. There’ll be more users working on the project than IT people and they’ll just be working side by side.

You are a CCHIT commissioner. Do you think certification has done what it was supposed to do in reducing provider risk and do you think that role is still important?

Well, that may be the most controversial question.

If you think about certification, I’ll divide into two phases. One is the formation of CCHIT, which was to help increase adoption of health information technology by removing some of the risk on the buying side, and that CCHIT certification really meant something and that when if you were buying a CCHIT-certified product, it wasn’t going to be perfect, but you could be assured it was going to have some baseline interoperability security and functionality.

I do think that that changed very much the way that people purchased systems. For example, the days of the scripted demos to make sure that you could do long lists of specific feature-function ..  those days are gone, and mostly because if it’s a CCHIT-certified product, you can already pull out the long list of feature-function, security, interoperability items that you know the product can do. I really believe very strongly in CCHIT moving the market forward.

My concern is that certification for ARRA is a significantly lower bar than CCHIT certification was. There is absolutely zero requirement for anything related to workflow in the ARRA certification. An implementation doesn’t fail based on any particular nit of functionality. It succeeds or fails based on whether it fits the workflow of the user — the doctor, the nurse, the scheduler, the accountant, whoever is doing that.

For example, in the office-based setting, tasking between physicians and nurses is a huge workflow component. That’s part of CCHIT certification, not part of ARRA certification. But you know if the physician or nurse in the office can’t affectively communicate and task patient follow-up back and forth, the implementation is going to fail. 

I am afraid that we are going to hear a wave of stories of failed implementations of ARRA-certified products. I fear that we will have physicians and offices saying, “I bought a certified product. Why can’t it run my office? Why doesn’t it do these basic things in the office?” It may do it, but the certification doesn’t guarantee that you’re going to have a product that’s actually going to work for the environment that you’re buying it.

There’s that argument to be made that CCHIT-type certification is for the product and maybe ARRA is the certification of the implementation, which are really unrelated because you can do some pretty amazing things with some pretty crappy products and you can take a really good product in the wrong hands and turn it into a disaster. Do you see any influence of the Regional Extension Centers in trying to close that gap between what the product can do versus what the users try to make it do?

I think that it’s exactly the right idea, you know, put experienced people feet on the street in the areas that people are trying to implement. I have not seen a lot of real impact of the Regional Extension Centers. I think there’s a lot of regional variation. I know that some here are doing really great things and really helping, and then I think that some others are not.

I’m not saying it’s easy to get into these small doc practices and make it work. I think it’s really hard. I’m not so sure that the Regional Extension Centers have really checked the box or been successful yet as a whole.

Everybody who’s trying to predict the next hot trend thinks it’s going to be data warehousing and business intelligence based on electronic data that these electronic medical record systems will create. What are you looking forward to or planning for at Edward Hospital as far as what kind of data you’ll have and what you’ll do with it?

We’ve had a data warehouse for quite a while. I think it’s because we were running a different system in the inpatient as in ambulatory as in operating room. We really needed to have a data warehouse in order to get any kind of basic information to run the business.

I do think that that’s going to deepen, but I find it very interesting. The biggest thing we’re working on other than Epic is a clinical integration project. What I mean by clinical integration is clinical integration in the FTC definition, where groups of hospitals and groups of physicians who are independent come together to work on cost and quality metrics and then therefore can come together to contract with commercial payers. I think a lot of people will consider it a steppingstone to an ACO, perhaps not with Medicare, but with the commercial payers and with not quite as much risk as there would be in a full ACO. It’s a way to learn something about aligning physicians.

While we have this really nice robust data warehouse, the data that we’re looking to rely on from our independent physicians is billing data. I can’t believe we’re still doing this, but if we’re trying to say, “What can our independent physicians give us that will allow us to track our cost and quality metrics so that we can present to commercial third-party insurance companies that we really deliver better service,” the kind of data that they can give us is the claims feed. We’re looking ICD-9s and CPT II codes.

And you know what? I don’t feel great about it, but it’s better than having no data. I can’t expect these small physician practices to be … you know, they don’t have data warehouse, a business intelligence person. They can only give us what they can give us and that’s that.

I think we can be really hospital-focused and think about all of our big IT resource staff, but when it comes down to it, the majority of care is being delivered in the ambulatory setting by physicians. Even though physicians are becoming employed at a very rapid rate, there still are a whole lot more independent physicians out there delivering care. They have the data. Ten years after being in IT, I never thought I’d be back to a claims feed.

When you look at the important trends and challenges with the ones you see at your hospital and in the industry overall, which ones do you think are most significant?

If you have like five number ones, they can’t be number one? I think the pressure on declining reimbursement just impacts everything, because it’s across the board and impacts everything you do — new program expansion, investment in technology, investment in training, all of those things. It creates an enormous amount of pressure.

The increased patient-consumer empowerment. The idea that well, physicians refer a lot of patients to Edward and physicians are a very important customer of mine. There are times when the patients pick the hospital first and then they pick their physician, so they’re coming to Edward first and then they’re looking for an Edward physician. I think that that’s just going to continue to increase.

Any final thoughts?

I have to tell you I’m super-excited about what we are doing here. I feel like the entire time that I was at Eclipsys and the entire time I was at CCHIT, I was working towards this really comprehensive, patient-focused electronic system. I’m now getting to implement it. I’m pretty excited about it.

 View/Print Text Only

From Hospital IT Guy: “Re: HIStalk. I don’t know how you produce such insightful and well-written news and comment as a part-time gig. Your posts give me a reality check and enhance my position as an HIT expert charged with leading us into a very uncertain future. Thanks for the body of work you produced this past year and for the work you hopefully will continue to produce in the year to come.” Thanks for those nice comments – they made my day. I have the luxury of being subsidized by hospital day job, which allows me to do whatever I want without pandering for a buck. New Year’s Day is a good time to take stock of where you are, so if you have ideas of how I could provide a better service to the industry (especially providers and patients), send them my way. I’m constrained by time (not to mention by being rather lazy and risk-averse) but I’m fairly creative in getting help and other resources when I need them. I don’t want to be sadly reflecting back from a nursing home bed, “I could have done so much more” and having only my bank account to produce as evidence that I wasn’t a total waste.

One of the first to-dos of the yet-unnamed HIT spawn of Microsoft and GE Healthcare should be to communicate to a skeptical market audience, with only 12% of poll respondents finding the announcement positive. New poll to your right, inspired by John Gomez’s article: if there’s a healthcare IT bubble, when will it burst?

My Time Capsule editorial from five years ago: 2006 Product Rankings – Pay Some Attention, But Not Too Much. It inadvertently highlights just how much Epic has changed the industry with its lengthening roster of top-ranked applications: “The most discouraging point is that no vendor does everything well, if you believe the scores. If you look at KLAS’s 15 main general solutions categories, you’d find 13 top-ranked vendors. If you’re a best-of-breed shop, you’ll end up with a lot of interfaced systems if you chase the winners. If you’re a single-vendor organization, some of your departments are going to be stuck with systems far short of being the best. And of course, in the next survey, they may all shuffle around anyway. ”

Weird News Andy wonders how much the patient was charged for the tape. Two ICU nurses at Utah Valley Regional Medical Center (UT) are fired for telling a moaning patient to shut up, then taping her mouth and laughing about it.

Listening: new from Phoenix-based Gooder, a cross between the infectious power pop of Gin Blossoms with hard-driving guitar and drums (Rush? Van Halen?) They have a really big, well-produced sound for a three-piece. The reader who recommended them has a relative in the band and didn’t really talk them up much (“I’m obliged to like them”) but I really like their sound.

Here’s the latest from Vince, who takes a break from profiling long-gone companies (and sadly, sometimes long-gone people who worked for them) and addresses how HIT vendors throw down at holiday party time. I like Slide 3, in which Vince, one of his company buds, and their wives are dressed to the nines in their hideous 1960s party fashions ready for a big night on the town. If you’re a 20-something industry noob, you will in 20 years or so look back with an equal mix of nostalgia and a little tinge of sadness when faced with images from your long-gone youth, which involved fewer wrinkles and pounds and visually obvious humble surroundings, yet beaming with both delight and surprise to have found a place in productive society and brimming with optimism about the endless future that lies ahead. You’ll know you’ve done well if looking back now is just as satisfying as looking ahead was then.

BIDMC CIO John Halamka announces on his blog that his wife Kathy has been diagnosed with breast cancer. He’s approaching it as you would expect for someone who’s both an engineer and a physician: he is reviewing her medical information, he has assembled a team of renowned experts, and he will be documenting the process with a weekly blog post. I had two immediate reactions: (a) I was surprised that I was affected by the news since I don’t know either John or his wife. I used to assume he was a self-promoting gasbag since he kept popping up everywhere, but the couple of times I’ve met him for a few seconds (as myself, not Mr. H) and interviewed him, he seemed to be a nice guy without much ego. Hearing about his wife was a bit of a blow. (b) as much as I’m happy that he has limitless resources available to him as a Harvard physician with a vast industry network, I kept thinking – what if it was my wife or mother? Why does his wife get better odds because of where he works and where they live?

That’s not a criticism of him at all, but rather an observation about how US healthcare works – it unfortunately helps to go to renowned facilities, to have enough time and money to demand the best when nobody’s offering it to you, and to challenge physicians for the best, personalized answers since healthcare is a cottage industry that is primitive if not indifferent with regard to standardized processes, best practices, and outcomes. Those of us who work in the system know that, while the majority of Americans get their care in undistinguished hospitals from undistinguished doctors whose treatment choices are often anything but evidence-based. I say that having worked in small-town hospitals that had the most incompetent physicians you could possibly imagine with a handful of pretty good ones thrown in, but all of them running thriving practices with patients who lived and died never knowing the difference. To this day, if I were to keel over in the waiting room of a small-town, for-profit hospital, the only medical instrument I want touching me is an ambulance gurney that’s taking me somewhere else in a hurry.

Update: John replied to me Christmas morning. I don’t know if I was clear in my brief writeup above, but he’s been very cool in my brief dealings with him, never too busy despite a superhuman scheduled to drop a few words of encouragement or deflect credit for some HIT development to someone else, which I think is the ultimate mark of a leader – he’s more than happy to let someone else have the limelight. He took the time (as did his wife Kathy) to respond to my comments above. Think about what must be going through their minds if you think this is trivial. There’s never a good time to receive sobering medical news, but imagine having it delivered just a few days before Christmas, with the expectation of being cheery around friends and family.

John writes:

At the same time I’m focused on Kathy’s care, I’m also deeply committed to quality, safety, efficiency, and equity in healthcare across the country.  In the upcoming weeks, I’ll describe how the electronic records that coordinate Kathy’s treatment provide the same protocols to every BIDMC patient, regardless of insurance status, profession, or income. My goal is the "right care" – not too much nor too little – that follows best practices from evidence. Decision support driven "right care" is the only way we can hope to improve outcomes while bending the cost curve of healthcare spending that threatens the US economy. Universal healthcare supported by universal adoption of electronic  and personal health records must be our guiding vision.

Kathy writes:

My life with John has been entwined for 32 years, so to say "we have cancer" cannot be more completely and utterly correct. True that physically, only one of use has the obvious organic symptoms, but our close partnership has been irrevocably changed by the diagnosis. Whatever lies ahead, it is impossible to go back to that innocent moment before hearing the word cancer.

I am luckier than most – I have health insurance, and access to a major urban medical center that is also a teaching and research hospital. But, in encouraging John to follow our progress publicly in his blog, I am keeping the memory of a friend close to my heart. She did not have health insurance (as a part time adjunct instructor of art). With this financial barrier, she unwittingly waited until the cancer had spread before seeking medical care, and although she fought bravely, she lost her battle with breast cancer.

Throughout my life, I have not needed medical care beyond occasional primary care visits and the birth of one child.  My first weeks negotiating the barrage of new terminology, new tests, new doctors has been significantly eased by my access to a complete electronic medical record. Even more important to me, my doctors can work as a team with open access to all the same instant information to help me make the best decisions for my health. As I think about my lost friend, I also am thinking of all others with a breast cancer diagnosis, or other serious illnesses, and about how they manage to work toward their cure if they worry about health insurance, or have no access to an electronic medical record.

Health Information Partnership for Tennessee releases some well made HIE videos that anybody who needs to talk up the HIE concept can use. CEO Keith Cox sent over the link.

One more update about sponsor charity work. Iatric Systems can’t bring its dispersed workforce together for a company party, so it allows employees to payroll deduct charitable contributions that the company then percentage matches. More than $19,000 was donated this year to Save-a-Limb, Relay for Live Japan Earthquake, Alzheimer’s Association, and London Marathon (since they have UK employees.) |

The 21-year-old who posed as a surgeon while counseling patients in the public areas of two Oregon hospitals is sentenced three years in prison. He also claimed to be a Microsoft employee, porn producer, and credit counselor.

A point I’ve been pondering for years, fanned back to life by a reader’s comment. Hospitals enjoy quite modest (if not negative) revenue increases each year, almost wholly driven by what the federal government decides it’s willing to pay them. The country is insolvent and there’s no political will to fix that, so it’s a certainty that the government will be paying less. How, then, can hospitals afford to lock themselves into IT contracts, especially maintenance ones, whose percentage cost increase each year exceeds the revenue increase the hospital expects? That’s especially true of IT systems (most of them) that generate minimal return on investment. I guess that’s why someone had to invent the “IT is like plumbing” argument to justify buying technology without questioning return on investment, but I’m wondering how that rationalization will stand as the going gets tougher. IT departments have the same challenge – how do you justify a 10% IT budget increase when the organization is only expecting a 2% revenue increase, or why does IT keep growing when front-line employees are having their hours flexed or their jobs eliminated? The folks at the top who approve IT purchases and budgets often forget that there’s an ongoing cost to the systems they want to buy.

The pending absorption of Alamance Regional Medical Center (NC) by Cone Health raises IT questions: what will happen with Alamance’s Allscripts Sunrise system given that Cone and the other big systems nearby (Wake Forest Baptist, Novant) are on Epic? The respective CEOs say they’ll probably just try to connect the systems in some way since it’s too expensive to implement Epic at Alamance.

Both MEDITECH and Cerner announced that they will be returning as HIMSS conference exhibitors after an absence of several years. I asked both companies about that decision, with responses from Paul Berthiaume (public relations manager of MEDITECH) and Zane Burke (EVP of Cerner’s client organization.)

Cerner and MEDITECH stopped exhibiting at HIMSS at about the same time and announced their return at about the same time. Were the companies expecting competitors to follow their lead and are coming back now because they didn’t?

MEDITECH
MEDITECH’s decisions regarding HIMSS participation were and are influenced solely by our needs and the needs of our customers. We don’t concern ourselves with our competitors, and we’re not trying to set nor follow any "vendor trends." We’re doing what works for us. This year, we have a particularly compelling story to tell as a leading EHR vendor. We want to share our customers’ successes reaching Stages 6 and 7 as well as achieving Meaningful Use Attestation, and we want to congratulate another Baldrige Award winner. Best of all, we’re going to debut an exciting new Web-based ambulatory product.

Cerner
When we made the decision to not exhibit at HIMSS, we shifted to other strategies to engage with our clients and the marketplace. Since then, one consistent request across our client base was to have a presence at HIMSS for a more personal interaction with our executives, IT support staff, and other clients. Over the years, we continued our HIMSS engagement across the Interoperability Showcase, demos with our industry partners and by supporting the educational components of HIMSS. This year, we will participate in these activities again, and we are excited to be able to meet our clients’ request and have a presence on the exhibit floor.

What will the company’s exhibit hall presence be? Do you have enough HIMSS points for the big, prime location booth, or do you have to work your way back up?

MEDITECH
We’ll be unveiling a new 40×40 booth at HIMSS, which we are excited about, and we’ll have members of our physician team in the booth meeting with customers. We encourage everyone to visit us at Booth #774.

Cerner
We have confirmed a sizable amount of floor space. We’d be happy to share additional details closer to the event.

Both companies say their customers wanted the company to return to the exhibit hall. If that’s the case, was it a mistake to pull out in the first place? What influence did a tough, competitive market and the peaking of HITECH-related system decisions have?

MEDITECH
I believe you’re referring to an earlier interview I gave, where the emphasis of our return was placed on customer demand. The focus is truly more on the timing being right for us; it’s the right time for us to allocate these resources and dollars. Our customers did miss us, and we certainly paid attention to that. In particular, our return to HIMSS gives our customers an opportunity to see our new products and to meet our team of physicians.

Cerner
Cerner and our clients have made significant advancements over the last few years and we are looking forward to participating at HIMSS to showcase these advancements with our clients more broadly. Our decision to come back to the HIMSS tradeshow floor is driven by many factors, including what we all can acknowledge is a strong health care industry making huge strides to improve quality and reduce cost. The diverse HIMSS audience gives us a chance to reconnect with our current clients and showcase to the broader health care community some of the exciting advances we’ve made in recent years.

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, and a belated Happy Festivus to all. Thanks for everybody who reads, sponsors, or otherwise supports HIStalk. I hope your holidays are amazing and that 2012 is your best year ever.

E-mail Mr. H.

 View/Print Text Only

I wrote weekly editorials for a boutique industry newsletter for several years, anxious for both audience and income. I learned a lot about coming up with ideas for the weekly grind, trying to be simultaneously opinionated and entertaining in a few hundred words, and not sleeping much because I was working all the time. They’re fun to read as a look back at what was important then (and often still important now).

I wrote this piece in December 2006.

2006 Product Rankings – Pay Some Attention, But Not Too Much
By Mr. HIStalk

The 2006 Best in KLAS Awards were just announced. I know a lot of folks wait anxiously for those, especially vendors.

KLAS has its critics, of which I’m occasionally one. I like the idea of surveying customers, but having taken KLAS surveys myself, I’ve seen first-hand how poorly designed some of their questions are. A respondent can’t complete the survey without in-depth knowledge of product functionality, support, documentation, executive relationships, hardware, and so on.

In other words, either the person cares so much that they carefully enlist the assistance of 3-10 colleagues, or they just wing the damn thing so they can get back to work instead of wasting time on yet another hard-to-finish survey. You guess which. At least KLAS sometimes follows up by phone.

All of that data collection and interpretation imprecision is masked by a numbing array of graphs, charts, and tables in the final product. No one pays attention to those, recognizing them as a way of padding out the sometimes-skimpy data to make it more impressive and convincing.

The scores tend to wander a lot from one report to the next, which KLAS attributes to swings in vendor or product performance. It’s much more likely to have been caused by the imprecision of the survey methodology. Do you really believe that Meditech’s client-server EMR was improved so much that it earned itself a move from sixth in an eight-horse race all the way up to second place in just one year? Me neither. KLAS marks it as having a low confidence level, so how do you interpret its score?

Still, I’d definitely pay attention to the top-ranked product and be careful with the last-place finishers. I wouldn’t try to overanalyze products in between, especially when the scores are close. Read the customer comments instead, the best part of the KLAS reports if you ask me (although you don’t know what kind of organizations and employees are being represented.)

The most discouraging point is that no vendor does everything well, if you believe the scores. If you look at KLAS’s 15 main general solutions categories, you’d find 13 top-ranked vendors. If you’re a best-of-breed shop, you’ll end up with a lot of interfaced systems if you chase the winners. If you’re a single-vendor organization, some of your departments are going to be stuck with systems far short of being the best. And of course, in the next survey, they may all shuffle around anyway.

My takeaway is this: somebody has to be last, and if the scores are tight, it may not mean much. On the other hand, why can’t a #1 ranked vendor in one product area use that knowledge to excel in the others? Or, do vendors selectively invest in some strategic lines and allow the others to languish? What does the #1 vendor know or do that everyone else doesn’t?

You don’t have to be a KLAS subscriber to see who’s #1. Just check out the HIMSS booth walls and vendor marketing material. You will need to pony up, though, to see who earned worst in KLAS and which vendors did well in important categories like “would you buy it gain.” That’s where the subscription is worth it. Use it like Consumer Reports for car-shopping – at the beginning and end of your selection process. The work in between is on your own.

 View/Print Text Only