As we’ve been doing the past few weeks, we’re excited to do a bit of a recap and commentary on last week’s #HITsm chat. For those who missed it, we talked about 2017 Goals for Healthcare IT. We started off with the famous Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAG) idea which made for some interesting conversation. You can find the full #HITsm tanscript for this chat on Symplur.
There was a wide ranging discussion over the hour, but a certain emphasis on more empowered patients. Here’s a look at some of the interesting ideas and our own commentary on what they tweeted.
Complete and accurate records would be a good start #hitsm
— Max Stroud (@MMaxwellStroud) January 13, 2017
It’s sad that this is a BHAG, but it certainly is a challenging goal given the disconnected nature of our healthcare system. Not to mention perverse incentives which make sharing healthcare data difficult to achieve.
T1 focus on the triple aim and make sure all apps add value to patient outcomes. The end customer is the patient, not the CFO #hitsm
— MEQAPI (@meqapi) January 13, 2017
The last line of this tweet really captured me. It certainly feels like much of healthcare is more beholden to the CFO than to the patient. That’s brutal for me to even type and is far too close to reality. Does anyone see this changing in the near future?
A1: 1) National Patient ID 2) #Interoperability 3) Over 50% of HC delivered via #Telemedicine #HITsm
— Joe Lavelle (@Resultant) January 13, 2017
I’m not sure if these classify as BHAGs or not. They sure feel like they won’t happen despite a lot of people interested in them becoming a reality.
T1. So simple, but so BHAG: Make #healthcare easier + better for PEOPLE. Address access, costs, & build doctor-patient partnerships. #hitsm
— HealthSparq (@HealthSparq) January 13, 2017
Make healthcare easier? Fascinating to think about. I wonder what cost we pay because healthcare is so hard.
T1: A standard API that works across all EHRs. I want that one app to works across all systems, not those siloed, weathered apps. #HITsm
— Greg Meyer (@Greg_Meyer93) January 13, 2017
This is a definite BHAG. What’s extraordinary is to start thinking about the innovation that could occur if this was a reality.
FHIR was a BHAG dream to make that happen, but the profiles and optionality aspect made it as bad as C-CDA. #HITsm @MandiBPro https://t.co/XCt2UtRAT3
— Greg Meyer (@Greg_Meyer93) January 13, 2017
I’d like to dig into this one more. Greg certainly knows a lot more about CCDA and FHIR than I do. This is a sad sign for the potential of FHIR going forward.
T2: Go beyond competence with training. Train with quality in mind. Quality & accuracy of data at each entrypoint #hitsm
— Max Stroud (@MMaxwellStroud) January 13, 2017
Topic 2 was about smaller goals that healthcare IT could achieve. I like this one from Max. It highlights a real challenge with how most EHR software programs were implemented. They were done in such a rush that most people were just training for competence. Is it any wonder that many EHR users are unsatisfied? I wonder if training them with quality in mind would change their views of EHRs.
T2: facilitate increased volumes of simple, short, actionable info exchange between patients, providers and health plans/payers. #HITsm
— Steve Sisko (@ShimCode) January 13, 2017
I shouldn’t be shocked, but I’m always surprised by how valuable improving communication can be. I think that’s true in every industry and many parts of life. However, Steve’s suggestion for healthcare is a good one and would likely provide tremendous benefit.
T2: Can we convince healthcare community across US that #HIT is part of the solution, NOT the problem?!? #TripleAim #BabySteps #HITSM
— GLHC_HIE (@GLHC_HIE) January 13, 2017
I wonder if this goal should have been under the BHAG section of the chat and not the “simple” goals section. The problem with this idea is that in many cases HIT has been part of the problem. We need to fix that and ensure that HIT is a solution for the majority of people who use it.
T3: The big non-profit health systems can have the most impact. They should have a goal to act like non-profits, not businesses #HITsm
— John Lynn (@techguy) January 13, 2017
I don’t see this changing, but I think it’s part of the problem. I’m always torn when I see this big party and ribbon cutting at the opening of a new hospital. Shouldn’t we be sad that they needed more beds? Shouldn’t we be celebrating when health is so improved that hospitals needed to shut down because they didn’t have enough business?
Yep. We too often forget that lower costs means someone is getting paid less.#HITsm https://t.co/lZASVHApkp
— John Lynn (@techguy) January 13, 2017
This relates to the tweet above it. We want lower costs, but who wants to get paid less?
T3: Like it or not, the #healthIT vendors have a ton of impact, but certainly OK to question if they are producing the right things. #HITsm
— Greg Meyer (@Greg_Meyer93) January 13, 2017
This is very true. And I think heatlhcare IT vendors could do more than they’re doing today. Many are just coasting. Plus, all of them have been distracted by so many government regulations. Is it time to just leave health IT vendors alone for a bit to let them innovate?
Next week's #HITsm chat Identifying, Engaging, & Learning from Health IT Influencers, Leaders & Organizations by Juliana Ruiz from @BryteBox
— Healthcare Scene (@HealthcareScene) January 13, 2017
Should be a fun chat. Always good to get new perspectives on learning and engagement. See you at next week’s #HITsm chat.