Home » Readers Write » Currently Reading:

Readers Write: Medication Electronic Prior Authorization, the Next Big Thing for EHRs

July 16, 2014 Readers Write 3 Comments

Medication Electronic Prior Authorization, the Next Big Thing for EHRs
By Tony Schueth

image

Electronic prescribing (ePrescribing) has surpassed the tipping point, where more prescriptions are being written electronically than on paper. Now the industry must start thinking about the next big thing that will take ePrescribing to the next level and address one of healthcare’s most inefficient processes: prior authorization (PA) of prescriptions.

With ePrescribing considered table stakes in an electronic health record (EHR), software developers should be thinking about innovations that will take ePrescribing from a humdrum utility to a must-have. Electronic prior authorization (ePA) for the pharmacy benefit offers that innovation opportunity.

EPA is the #1 ePrescribing capability desired by physicians, according to market research conducted by NCPDP’s ePA Task Group. In order to foster a standardized approach to satisfy this demand, NCPDP approved an electronic data interchange (EDI) standard for ePA last year.

By design, the ePA transaction can be integrated with the EHR ePrescribing work flow, enabling prescribers to complete the prior authorization process within two minutes as compared with the manual process, which involves many phone calls and faxes that can take days to weeks to complete (15 days, on average). Considering that specialty medications dominate the drug pipeline and require prior authorization up to 95 percent of the time, the need for ePA is urgent.

Seven states have mandated the use of ePA beginning in late 2014 and eight others are engaged in ePA regulatory activity. In May, the National Committee on Vital Health Statistics (NCVHS) recommended that the Department of Health and Human Services adopt the NCPDP transaction as the standard for medication PAs. NCVHS recommendations regarding ePrescribing and related transactions often become requirements for payer participation in Medicare Part D.

The coming regulatory mandates afford EHR vendors the opportunity to be ahead of the curve. Rather than scrambling to meet multiple state regulatory deadlines at the last minute, vendors can take advantage of the interval between Meaningful Use (MU) Stages 2 and 3 to begin development of ePA functionality while there is still breathing room to concentrate on work flow enhancements.

The availability of ePA may sway some physicians in their EHR choice. Recently, Surescripts found that 28 percent of physicians surveyed would switch their EHR for one that supports ePA. While this percentage may be exaggerated based upon a single feature, there is no question that a robust replacement market for EHRs exists. Many physicians are looking to transition from early purchases of basic EHRs to more sophisticated solutions.

EDI networks such as Surescripts have begun offering ePA connectivity, while such established ePA services vendors as CoverMyMeds have introduced APIs to ease EHR integration. Some service providers offer connectivity for all ePAs – even if a pharmacy benefit manager or other payer isn’t electronically enabled, electronically initiated ePAs are delivered via fax.

The time is right. EPA is a logical and useful enhancement that physicians desire. A transaction standard that ensures compatibility is in place. Regulators are beginning to mandate its use. The number of PAs is growing. EDI networks and service vendors are eager to ease integration.

With the rare opportunity posed by the MU Stage 2 delay, vendors can roll out a new feature that is a “win-win-win-win” benefit for physicians, patients, payers, and EHR vendors.

Tony Schueth is founder, CEO and managing partner at Point-of-Care Partners of Coral Springs, FL.

View/Print Text Only View/Print Text Only


HIStalk Featured Sponsors

     

Currently there are "3 comments" on this Article:

  1. Mr. Schueth,
    I love what you are saying and agree entirely. The cynic in me has to make two points, though:

    1. Since when does a “useful enhancement that physicians desire” drive EMR/EHR development? Unfortunately, the list of non-provider priorities is long and comes first.

    2. The assumption here is that the insurance industry would support a more efficient process for PA. In fact, their performance suggests that PA itself, as well as more barriers to PA, are seen as a cost-cutting benefit to the insurer. The whole PA/ pharmacy benefits industry is based on this concept. Facilitating ePA would involve transparent rules for authorization, which they do not want to provide; if they did, we would be able to view them already. In other words. it would be nice to have the process of ePA, but it will be of little benefit without strong insurer participation.

  2. “vendors can take advantage of the interval between Meaningful Use (MU) Stages 2 and 3 to begin development of ePA functionality”

    You do realize that vendors do not just do development to meet MU right? I’m sure they’ll be plenty busy doing development that MU hasn’t allowed them time to do. I’d rather they fix bugs and deliver a more stable product than add another feature in the lull between adding more MU features.

  3. “Many physicians are looking to transition from early purchases of basic EHRs to more sophisticated solutions.” Really? Physicians want simple -easy to use EHR’s not more complex sophisticated solutions. Many physicians use EHR’s and e-prescribing because they are mandated – not necessarily by choice. The costs today have driven many physicians to leave their independent practices and join larger groups – often institutionally owned- and given their own choice they would not have adopted EHR’s







Subscribe to Updates

Search


Loading

Text Ads


Report News and Rumors

No title

Anonymous online form
E-mail
Rumor line: 801.HIT.NEWS

Tweets

Archives

Founding Sponsors


 

Platinum Sponsors


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gold Sponsors


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reader Comments

  • Ben: Agreed. As a veteran and long-time member of our industry, I agree with Dr. Rick. My VA providers have always said ...
  • Echo chamber: Why wouldn't Cerner, or Epic, or any other commercial vendor be able to innovate as fast or faster? I'm guessing Vista ...
  • Fake News: Dr. Weinhaus' conclusion is as flawed as his proffered evidence. The Texas Health issue with Ebola was tracked back to ...
  • Brian Too: There is so much that is right about this post. So why then do I find myself disagreeing with the message? Highlight...
  • Expat Consultant Guy: I don’t know if this is getting traction back home, but Epic’s having a mess of a time with its program in Denmark. ...

Sponsor Quick Links