Thank you for calling out the implied coercion of signing electronically a pad to give consent for pages of legalese.…
Readers Write: It’s Time for the EHR to Give Back to Clinicians
It’s Time for the EHR to Give Back to Clinicians
By David Lareau
David Lareau is CEO of Medicomp Systems of Chantilly, VA.
Recently, a colleague (who just happens to be an MD) relayed a story after accompanying his 93-year-old mother to a routine check-up for wet macular degeneration. She had been recently discharged from the hospital after an episode of atrial fibrillation, for which she was put on an anticoagulant. At the retinal specialist appointment, the patient access / intake representative was told of her A-fib episode and the medication change, which was dutifully entered into the medical record.
Fast forward to 10 minutes later and 50 feet down the hallway in the exam room. The retinal specialist enters and asks if the patient is ready for her regular injection in her eye. Naturally, the patient’s MD son raises the red flag and asks if she had consulted the medical record. The doctor acknowledged that she had, but didn’t see what had changed.
Granted, very few folks have an internist son who can accompany them and act as a personal medical record interoperability specialist. But the message is clear. Here we are, some 40 years into the EMR age, and many of the same old interoperability and usability issues that plague these systems are still with us.
Fortunately, progress has been made and is escalating. It’s been a quiet, behind-the-scenes process, but it’s happening. In 2003, the government approved national terminology standards, including SNOMED and RxNorm, and others have followed. Then, in 2009, with the HITECH Act, some $40 billion were distributed to promote and expand the use of electronic health records. And in 2012, the FHIR standard first emerged as a way to exchange information. The groundwork was laid, and this has accelerated in the last three years with increasing adopting of FHIR. The potential for incremental innovation and the acceptance that things need to change is encouraging.
Over the past few years, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown that clinicians need better data. People have become comfortable with virtual visits. As a result, physicians, particularly those in primary care treating Medicare patients, are losing much of the high-touch environment of the past and need faster access to better data. But the industry has been slow to adopt the sharing of information because there was no mandate. This all changed with the advent of the 21st Century Cures Act.
The widespread adoption of FHIR over the past two or three years has enabled us to diagnostically connect information that has spread throughout disparate systems. And now with the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA) to establish the infrastructure for information exchange, it’s increasingly possible to find clinically relevant information, transmit it, and access it at the point of care.
Ultimately, dramatic change will be driven by the management of chronic conditions within Medicare Advantage, the government’s move to value-based care. Reimbursing providers for how well they manage conditions and control costs will accelerate the need to provide clinicians with the clinical information connected to the diagnoses they’re trying to treat.
Medicare Advantage now accounts for 42% of all Medicare patients, a figure that the Congressional Budget Office predicts will rise modestly to 50% by 2030 given no changes in policy or structures. Meanwhile, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation recently issued a statement saying that their aspirational goal was that 100% of Medicare patients be on these managed plans by 2030. They admit they won’t get reach this goal, but that tells us that they are not completely comfortable with the current policy. They want to accelerate the adoption of Medicare Advantage, which is really all about managing patients’ chronic conditions.
This is important because commercial payers historically have followed the Medicare model for reimbursement.
For all the advances and progress in interoperability and usability, challenges remain. There’s been a lot of talk about AI, machine learning, and letting the computer figure it out. These are promising technologies, and there are initiatives underway involving ambient listening and clinical notes. Despite progress on this front, clinical notes remain just the way they were several years ago––a bunch of text. It may be advancing, and it’s helping the clinician to do their work, but it’s not really giving anything back to clinicians. That is one of the things missing in our industry. Systems have been designed over the years to simply collect billing data, as opposed to giving something back to the clinician that uses them.
This raises the question of usability.
If you think back to the story about my colleague’s mother, the system was so unusable that the clinician had a hard time looking at an updated problem list. Usability is coming to the forefront because clinicians are simply getting tired. They talk about it. There are studies showing that systems that are not usable or clinically relevant, or giving something back, are burning physicians out. We can, and must, do better.
Usability, interoperability, the Cures Act, and TEFCA are all converging along with the accompanying data tsunami (and, yes, it will be a tsunami) to change the way we use healthcare data. Thankfully, we have a FHIR standard that appears to be the platform for interoperability going forward. And there are technologies available and in the works to make the flood of data usable at the point of care. Clinicians to need to be able to see that data and act upon that data.
With the move to value-based care changing the focus of the industry to “How do I best manage this patient and get better outcomes for each of their clinical conditions?” we see a wave of innovation being unleashed. That wave is spreading to existing systems and infrastructures, and it enables the industry to respond.
Modernizing these systems so that they give something back to the provider at the point of care is the goal. We are excited about the possibilities for innovation and the acceptance that things need to change.
How could anyone dislike a more usable system, I would like to the dislikes to write something about why.
Wasn’t me, but I don’t think the dislikes disliked a more usable system. They disliked an article that was mostly technobabble and didn’t deal with the actual problem in the example, which was that the listing of the anticoagulant was probably in fact there and was ignored.