Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and EHR for FREE!

Few Practices Rely Solely On EMR Analytics Tools To Wrangle Data

Posted on May 23, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

A new survey done by a trade group representing medical practices has concluded that only a minority of practices are getting full use of their EMR’s analytics tools.

The survey, which was reported on by Becker’s Hospital Review, was conducted by the Medical Group Management Association.  The MGMA’s survey called on about 900 of its members to ask how their practices used EMRs for analytics.

First, and most unexpectedly in today’s data-driven world, 11 percent of respondents said that they don’t analyze their EMR data at all.

Thirty-one percent of respondents told MGMA that they use all of their EMR’s analytical capabilities, and 22 percent of respondents said they used some of their EMR’s analytics capabilities.

Another 31 percent reported that they were using both their EMR’s analytics tools and tools from an external vendor. Meanwhile, 5 percent said they used only an external vendor for data analytics.

According to Derek Kosiorek, CPEHR, CPHIT, principal consultant with MGMA’s Health Care Consulting Group, the survey results aren’t as surprising as they may seem. In fact, few groups are likely to get  everything they need from EMR data, he notes.

“Many practices do not have the resources to mine the data and organize it in ways to create new insights from the clinical, administrative and financial information being captured daily,” said Kosiorek in a related blog post. “Even if your practice has the staff with the knowledge and time to create reports, the system often requires an add-on product sold by the vendor or an outside product or service to analyze the data.”

However, he predicts that this will change in the near future. Not only will EMR analytics help groups to tame their internal data, it will also aggregate data from varied community settings such as the emergency department, outpatient care and nursing homes, he suggests. He also expects to see analytics tools offer a perspective on care issues brought by regional data for similar patients.

At this point I’m going to jump in and pick up the mic. While I haven’t seen anyone from MGMA comment on this, I think this data – and Kosiorek’s comments in particular – underscore the tension between population health models and day-to-day medical practice. Specifically, they remind us that doctors and regional health systems naturally have different perspectives on why and how they use data.

On the one hand there’s medical practices which, from what I’ve seen, are of necessity practical. These providers want first and foremost to make individual patients feel good and if sick get better. If that can be done safely and effectively I doubt most care about how they do it. Sure, doctors are aware of pop health issues, but those aren’t and can’t be their priority in most cases.

Then, you have hospitals, health systems and ACOs, which are already at the forefront of population health management. For them, having a consistent and comprehensive set of tools for analyzing clinical data across their network is becoming job one. That’s far removed from focusing on day-to-day patient care.

It’s all well and good to measure whether physicians use EMR analytics tools or not. The real issue is whether large health organizations and practices can develop compatible analytics goals.

MIPS Eligibility Letters and Physician Reputation – MACRA Monday

Posted on May 22, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the MACRA Monday series of blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

Anshu Jindal has a great post up on the My MIPS Score website that talks about the MIPS Eligibility letters that so many people have been waiting for to know if they are required to participate in MIPS or if they are exempt from participating in MIPS.

Here’s a sample eligibility letter that they shared:
MIPS Eligibility Letter from CMS

There are a number of interesting options available based on if your group TIN is eligible to be included in MIPS or not and if your providers are eligible or not at the NPI level. In the post mentioned above, Anshu does a nice analysis of the financial impact of choosing to participate in MIPS at the TIN level vs the individual provider level or vice versa. The financial impact can be quite large for your organization and so you’ll want to go through that post and see what this means for your practice.

As they also mention in their post, the short-term financial impact of not participating in MIPS could be more than most people realize. However, not having a MIPS composite score could have an even larger impact on your long-term reputation. The more I’ve considered this idea, the more I’ve realized that a lot of practices that choose to opt out of MIPS are going to get blindsided by this.

This is true for those that choose the most basic pick your pace option as well. When a potential future patient sees that you have a very low MIPS score on one of the consumer facing physician rating websites, they’re not going to know how to appropriately assess what a low MIPS composite score means. They’ll naturally (and quite often incorrectly) assume that a low MIPS composite score means that you’re a poor doctor. Most of these rating websites aren’t going to educate their end users on how to properly interpret the MIPS score and your reputation will suffer if you have no score or if you purposefully choose to get a low score.

I know quite a few doctors who are choosing to not participate in MIPS out of principle. In some areas where there is more demand for doctors in their specialty than supply, then it might not be a huge issue. However, in a lot of areas, not participating in MIPS could potentially have a significant impact on your reputation. Sad, but true.

Be sure to check out all of our MACRA Monday blog posts where we dive into the details of the MACRA Quality Payment Program.

E-Patient Update: The Kaiser Permanente Approach To Consumer Health IT

Posted on May 19, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

Usually, particularly when I have complaints, I don’t name the providers or vendors who serve my healthcare needs, largely because I don’t want to let my personal gripes overshadow my analysis of a particular health IT issue.

That being said, I thought I’d veer from that rule today, as I wanted to share some details on how Kaiser Permanente, my new provider and health plan, supports consumers with health IT functions. Despite having started with Kaiser – in this case the DC metro division – less than a week ago, being an e-patient I’ve had my hands all over its Web – and mobile-based options for patients.

I’m not going to say the system is perfect by any means. There are some blind alleys on the web site, and some problems in integrating clinical information into consumer records, but so far their set-up largely seems thoughtful and well-managed.

Having allegedly spent $4 billion plus on its Epic rollout, it’s hard to imagine how Kaiser could have realized that big a return even several years later, but it seems that the healthcare giant is at least doing many of the right things.

Getting enrolled

My first contact with Kaiser, after signing up with Healthcare.gov, was a piece of snail-mail which provided us with our insurance cards and a summary of our particular coverage. The insurance cards included my health plan ID/medical record number.

To enroll on the core Kaiser site, kp.org, I had to supply the record number, my birth date and a few other basic pieces of information. I also downloaded the KP app, which offers a far-more-elegant interface to the same functions.

Medical appointments

Once logged in, it was easy to choose a primary care doctor and OB/GYN by searching the site and clicking a selection button. If you wished you could review physician profiles and educational history as well as testimonial quotes from patients about that doctor before you chose them.

Having chosen a doctor, booking an appointment with them online was easy.  As with Zocdoc.com, you entered a range of dates for a possible consult, then chose the slot that worked for you. And if you need to cancel one of those appointments, it’s easy to do so online.

Digital communication

I was glad to see that the Kaiser portal allows you to email your doctor directly, something which is less common than you might think. (My last primary care group wouldn’t even put their doctors on the phone.)

Not only that, everyone I’ve talked to at KP so far– three medical appointments, as I was playing catch-up — has stressed that the email function isn’t just for show. My new providers insisted that they do answer email messages, and that I shouldn’t hesitate to write if I have questions or concerns.

Another way KP leverages digital communications is the simple, but effective, device of texting me when my prescriptions are due for a refill. This may not sound like much, but convenience matters! (I can also check med reminders by logging in to a custom KP meds app.)

Data sharing

Given that everyone at Kaiser uses the same Epic EMR, clinicians are of course more aware of what their colleagues are doing than my past gaggle of disconnected specialists. They seem quite serious about reading this history before seeing me, something which past physicians haven’t always done, even if I was previously seen by someone else in their practice.

KP also uses Epic’s Care Everywhere function, which allows them to pull in a limited summary of care from other Epic-based providers. While Care Everywhere has limits, the providers are making use of what they can.

One small wrinkle was that prior to two of my visits, I filled out a questionnaire online and when asked to submit it to my electronic patient record, did so. Nonetheless, I was asked to fill out the same questionnaire again, on paper, when I saw a specialist.

Test results

KP seems to be set up appropriately to share standard test results. However, I’ve already had one test, a mammogram, and in doing so found out that their data sharing infrastructure isn’t quite complete.

After being scanned, I was told that I’d receive my results via snail-mail, in about two weeks. I’m glad that this was a routine screening, rather than a test to investigate something scary, as I would have been pretty upset with this news if I was worried.

My conclusions

I don’t want to romanticize Kaiser’s consumer HIT services. After all, looked at one way, KP is only doing what integrated health systems are supposed to do, and not without at least a few hitches.

Still, at least on first view, on the whole I’m pretty happy with how Kaiser’s interactive functions are deployed, as well the general attitude staff members seem to have about consumer use of HIT tools. Generally speaking, they seem to encourage it, and for someone like me that’s quite welcome.

As I see it, if providers outside of the Kaiser bubble were as married to a shared infrastructure as KP providers are, my care would be much improved. Let’s see if I still if I still feel that way after the new health plan smell has worn off!

Women Executives in Telehealth American Telemedicine Association ATA2017

Posted on May 18, 2017 I Written By

Healthcare as a Human Right. Physician Suicide Loss Survivor. Janae writes about Artificial Intelligence, Virtual Reality, Data Analytics, Engagement and Investing in Healthcare. twitter: @coherencemed

Susan Dentzer, Charlotte Yeh, Janet McIntyre, and Janae Sharp at the American Telemed Women Executives in Telehealth Panel

One of the highlights of the American Telemedicine conference in Orlando Florida was excellent coverage of women in telemedicine and leadership.  They had a panel of women in leadership which focused on promoting women in telemedicine and had the best moderation of a panel I’ve seen at a conference.  Highlights of great advice for women in HealthIT were from that panel, and from speaking with women that were tasked with going to the conference as buyers in the telemedicine space.

Charlotte Yeh acted as moderator of the panel. She framed what the panel would cover and what they were not concerned with. She mentioned that we would not cover work life balance since that also applies to men and has been covered on many platforms.  Framing a conversation within the conference and healthcare setting made a huge impact.  Promoting women in telemedicine and HealthIT needs to have a specific framework.

Susan Dentzer, President and CEO of the Network for Excellence in Healthcare innovation suggested making an award for advancing women in leadership in Telehealth.  I’m a huge fan of medals for participation. Every day I get up and when I work out I suspect that I deserve a medal.  The medals for best contribution for advancing women next year should be an amazing ceremony at ATA.

Susan quoted Madeline Albright that “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t support other women.” Think deliberately about creating something you want to be a part of. This year I’ve personally seen Max Stroud of Doyenne Connections simply create something she wanted to be a part of.

Julie Hall-Barrow invited leaders to find a young woman and become their mentor. Some of the women in leadership in healthcare are happy to promote other women but the promotion seems more strategic than like actual concern. Leaders should purposefully craft their ideal mentor relationship. ATA discussed creating a group dedicated to what women and companies in the telemedicine space would like to do with collaboration.

Paula Guy, when asked what she would tell a younger self, said “first of all I would tell myself not to get married so many times.” Her advice was hilarious and focused on not letting people tell you no. There is a power in knowing what you are capable of and surrounding yourself with other women who are also in that space. Paula’s advice was also to be part of a group that promotes mentors and other women working together.

Kristi Henderson spoke about not being afraid to push boundaries. Never settle until you get where you want to go. The advice and positive belief that women are capable of breaking through boundaries and leveraging their social connecting makes women poised for success despite being underrepresented.

Janet McIntyre, The Vice President of Professional services of the Colorado Hospital association, decided to approach Patrick Kennedy about coming to Colorado to help with the opioid epidemic there. He shared his family story and personal conviction about making a difference and Janet decided to invite him to help with her state.  Women need to be fearless in their ask and expect that people will want to help them succeed.

Rachel Dixon, director of Telehealth for AccessCare services, pointed out that women should have a safe space to discuss gender issues in their work. We can create a place to discuss which companies are working well with women in the telemedicine space and which ask about an older man partner or lack professionalism. I shared a story with her about a potential employer asking if he should consider my job only a work proposition.  Gender issues for a younger woman in leadership can be complex in navigating personal relationship. A soft intelligence network about how a company treats women is valuable for investors and employees.

I was impressed with the positive planning of women in healthcare leadership in telehealth. The thought leadership at this conference was one of the best organized in terms of giving organizations and individuals actionable plans for increasing female technology talent in leadership positions.

Dogged By Privacy Concerns, Consumers Wonder If Using HIT Is Worthwhile

Posted on May 17, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

I just came across a survey suggesting that while we in the health IT world see a world of possibilities in emerging technologies, consumers aren’t so sure. The researchers found that consumers question the value of many tech platforms popular with health execs, apparently because they don’t trust providers to keep their personal health data secure.

The study, which was conducted between September and December 2016, was done by technology research firm Black Book. To conduct the survey, Black Book reached out to 12,090 adult consumers across the United States.

The topline conclusion from the study was that 57 percent of consumers who had been exposed to HIT through physicians, hospitals or ancillary providers doubted its benefits. Their concerns extended not only to EHRs, but also to many commonly-deployed solutions such as patient portals and mobile apps. The survey also concluded that 70 percent of Americans distrusted HIT, up sharply from just 10 percent in 2014.

Black Book researchers tied consumers’ skepticism to their very substantial  privacy concerns. Survey data indicated that 87 percent of respondents weren’t willing to divulge all of their personal health data, even if it improved their care.

Some categories of health information were especially sensitive for consumers. Ninety-nine percent were worried about providers sharing their mental health data with anyone but payers, 90 percent didn’t want their prescription data shared and 81 percent didn’t want information on their chronic conditions shared.

And their data security worries go beyond clinical data. A full 93 percent responding said they were concerned about the security of their personal financial information, particularly as banking and credit card data are increasingly shared among providers.

As a result, at least some consumers said they weren’t disclosing all of their health information. Also, 69 percent of patients admitted that they were holding back information from their current primary care physicians because they doubted the PCPs knew enough about technology to protect patient data effectively.

One of the reason patients are so protective of their data is because many don’t understand health IT, the survey suggested. For example, Black Book found that 92 percent of nurse leaders in hospital under 200 beds said they had no time during the discharge process to improve patient tech literacy. (In contrast, only 55 percent of nurse leaders working in large hospitals had this complaint, one of the few bright spots in Black Book’s data.)

When it comes to tech training, medical practices aren’t much help either. A whopping 96 percent of patients said that physicians and staff didn’t do a good job of explaining how to use the patient portal. About 40 percent of patients tried to use their medical practice’s portal, but 83 percent said they had trouble using it when they were at home.

All that being said, consumers seemed to feel much differently about data they generate on their own. In fact, 91 percent of consumers with wearables reported that they’d like to see their physician practice’s medical record system store any health data they request. In fact, 91 percent of patients who feel that their apps and devices were important to improving their health were disappointed when providers wouldn’t store their personal data.

Researcher Puts Epic In Third Place For EMR Market Share

Posted on May 16, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

A new research report tracking market share held by EMR vendors puts Epic in third place, behind Cerner and McKesson, a conclusion which is likely to spark debate among industry watchers.

The analyst firm behind the report, Rockville, MD-based Kalorama Information, starts by pointing out that despite the hegemony maintained by larger EMR vendors, the competition for business is still quite lively. With customers still dissatisfied with their systems, the hundreds of vendors still in the market have a shot at thriving, it notes.

Kalorama publisher Bruce Carlson argues that until the larger firms get their act together, there will still be plenty of opportunity for these scrappy smaller players: “It’s still true to say no company, not even the largest healthcare IT firms, have even a fifth of this market,” Carlson said in a published statement. “We think that is because there’s still usability, vendor-switching, lack of mindshare in the market and customers are aching for better.”

In calculating how much each vendor has of the EMR market, the analyst firm estimated each vendors’ hardware, software and services revenue flowing directly from EMRs, breaking out the percentage each category represented for each vendor. All projects were based on 2016 data.

Among the giants, Kalorama ranks Cerner as having the biggest market share, McKesson as second in place and Epic as third. The report’s observations include:

  • That Cerner is picking up new business, in part, due to the addition of its CernerITWorks suite, which works with hospital IT departments, and Cerner RevWorks, which supports revenue cycle management functions. Kalorama also attributes Cerner’s success to the acquisition of Siemens IT and its having won the Department of Defense EMR contract.
  • That McKesson is building on its overall success as a health IT vendor, which puts it in a good position to build on its existing technology. For example, it has solutions addressing medication safety, information access, revenue cycle management, resource use and physician adoption of EMRs, including Paragon, Horizon, EHRM, Star and Series for hospitals, along with Practice Partners, Practice Point Plus and Fusion for ambulatory care.
  • That Epic serves giant customers like Kaiser Permanente, as well as holding a major share of new business in the EMR market. Kalorama is predicting that Epic will pick up more ambulatory customers, which it has focused on more closely of late.

The report also lists Allscripts Healthcare Solution, which came in fourth. Meanwhile, it tosses in GE Healthcare, Athenahealth’s Intersystems, QSI/NextGen, MEDITECH, Greenway and eClinicalWorks in with a bundle of at least 600 companies active in the EMR market.

The report summary we editors got didn’t include some details on how the market components broke down. I would like to know more about the niches in which these vendors play.

For example, having seen a prediction earlier this year that the physician practice market would hit $17.6 billion worldwide within seven years, it would be interesting to see that dot connected with the rest of the market share information. Specifically, I’d like to know how much of the ambulatory EMR market included integrated practice management software. That would tell me something about where overall solutions for physicians were headed.

However, I still got something out of the information Kalorama shared.  As our esteemed publisher John Lynn often notes, all market share measurements are a bit, um, idiosyncratic at best, and some are not even that reliable. But as I see it the estimates are worth considering nonetheless, as they challenge us to look at the key moving parts in the EMR market. Hey, and it gives us something to talk about at tradeshow parties!

Does Your EHR Sell Your EHR Data?

Posted on May 12, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I recently saw a tongue-in-cheek tweet from Howard Green, MD about how healthcare shares data:

There has always been a disconnect between providers and EHR vendors saying they can’t share data and then EHR vendors can easily sell and share EHR data to the healthcare industry. If you don’t think this happens at large scales in healthcare, then you need to look no further than IMS which last I checked was a multi billion dollar public company on the back of our health data.

The “sharing” or should we say selling of EHR data is big business and happening a lot more than we realize. I know the Patient Privacy Rights organization was trying to make a map of all the ways your health data was being shared. However, you can imagine that’s an almost impossible task to accomplish. I think most of us would be shocked to see how far and wide are health data is shared.

I wonder how many doctors know the answer to this question, “Does your EHR sell your EHR data?”

My guess is that most doctors assume that their EHR data is not being sold. For a number of EHR vendors, that’s probably true. However, my guess is that most doctors don’t know their EHR vendor’s policy on selling EHR data. If you don’t know, you should ask your EHR vendor and find out.

For those EHR vendors that are selling EHR data, you can be sure that they will happily reply that any EHR data they sell is de-identified. They’ll argue that it’s not a violation of HIPAA because it doesn’t have any PHI because they’ve de-identified the data and only sell the data in aggregate. No doubt there are many that would argue that there’s no perfect way to totally de-identify your EHR data and that when combined with other sources, they can often identify your patients.

This is big business and so it’s easy to see why an EHR vendor would give the go ahead to de-identify and sell the data stored in their EHR. Although, it is disappointing when they’re doing this and their users don’t know that’s the case.

If you’ve asked your vendor if they sell your EHR data, we’d love to hear what they say. How did they respond? Are you ok with your EHR selling your de-identified EHR data?

Where Do Doctors Turn for the Latest Innovations?

Posted on May 11, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

At last month’s Health IT Marketing and PR Conference, I hosted a panel of customers to talk about what type of marketing tactics work for them. We had a broad range of people on the panel, so there was a wide variety of perspectives on how they discovered new innovations for their organization.

However, one thing stood out to me for one of the doctors that practiced in a relatively small 5 person group practice. He honestly didn’t have any great places to turn when he had a problem he needed to be solved. You got the feeling that he went to Google as much as he did anything else. Although, bewilderment was really his first response.

After some time he did come out with some common answers such as when he attends his association conferences and when he talks to his peers. No doubt doctors largely trust the opinions of their peers. However, there’s not nearly as much peer sharing as you might think. I remember another doctor I know in this physician’s practice which bought season tickets to the local college team’s basketball games. His idea was that he could go to the games with his peers. He couldn’t get any of them to go with him.

With these thoughts in mind, we’re chewing on how we at Healthcare Scene can help these practices out. One idea we have is to essentially create knowledge centers that will list all of the various companies and products that could help a small practice be more effective and efficient. We did this with EMR and EHR vendors in the past as many were looking for that type of list. We’re asking ourselves if we can do the same for other categories of software and services that could help doctors be more effective at what they do.

We’d love to hear your thoughts on this idea and any other ways we can help doctors discover new innovations. It’s a challenging idea since it isn’t like there’s one healthcare IT market for small practices. The needs vary by specialty, group size, location, etc etc etc. However, we’ll do our best. Plus, we’ll do like we always do and iteratively improve the lists over time.

One other idea I’m hoping to execute is to do as many origin stories for the products we list as possible. I think it’s extremely powerful to know the origin of a company and how they ended up with the solution they offer. Did they start this way? Did they acquire a company to get into the business? Did they start with another product and then pivot to what they’re doing today when they saw the opportunity? Knowing this information is powerful.

Hopefully in the future we can point to a vast library of knowledge centers that can better help a practice know about companies that can help them work more effectively and efficiently.

Using AI To Streamline EMR Workflow For Clinicians

Posted on May 10, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

Understandably, most of the discussion around AI use in healthcare focuses on data analytics for population health management and predictive analytics. Given the massive scale of the data we’re collecting, that’s no surprise.

In fact, one could argue that using AI technologies has gone from an interesting idea to an increasingly established parto the health IT mix. After all, few human beings can truly understand what’s revealed by terabytes of data on their own, even using well-designed dashboards, filters, scripting and what have you. I believe it takes a self-educating AI “persona,” if you will, to glean advanced insights from the eternity of information we have today.

That being said, I believe there’s other compelling uses for AI-fueled technologies for healthcare organizations. If we use even a relatively simple form of interpretive intelligence, we can improve health IT workflows for clinicians.

As clinicians have pointed out over and over, most of what they do with EMRs is repetitive monkey work, varied only by the need to customize small but vital elements of the medical record. Tasks related to that work – such as sending copies of a CT scan to a referring doctor – usually have to be done in another application. (And that’s if they’re lucky. They might be forced to hunt down and mail a DVD disc loaded with the image.)

Then there’s documentation work which, though important enough, has to be done in a way to satisfy payers. I know some practice management systems that integrate with the office EMR auto-populate the patient record with coding and billing information, but my sense is that this type of automation wouldn’t scale within a health system given the data silos that still exist.

What if we used AI to make all of this easier for providers? I’m talking about using a predictive intelligence, integrated with the EMR, that personalizes the way data entry, documentation and follow-up needs are presented. The AI solution could automatically queue up or even execute some of the routine tasks on its own, leaving doctors to focus on the essence of their work. We all know Dr. Z doesn’t really want to chase down that imaging study and mail it to Albany. AI technology could also route patients to testing and scans in the most efficient manner, adjusted for acuity of course.

While AI development has been focused on enterprise issues for some time, it’s already moving beyond the back office into day-to-day care. In fact, always-ahead-of-the-curve Geisinger Health System is already doing a great deal to bring AI and predictive analytics to the bedside.

Geisinger, which has had a full-featured EMR in place since 1996, was struggling to aggregate and manage patient data, largely because its legacy analytics systems couldn’t handle the flood of new data types emerging today.

To address the problem, the system rolled out a unified data architecture which allowed it to integrate current data with its existing data analytics and management tools. This includes a program bringing together all sepsis-vulnerable patient information in one place as they travel through the hospital. The tool uses real-time data to track patients in septic shock, helping doctors to stick to protocols.

As for me, I’d like to see AI tools pushed further. Let’s use them to lessen the administrative burden on overworked physicians, eliminating needless chores and simplifying documentation workflow. And it’s more than time to use AI capabilities to create a personalized, efficient EMR workflow for every clinician.

Think I’m dreaming here? I hope not! Using AI to eliminate physician hassles could be a very big deal.

Finding New Patients for Your Practice

Posted on May 9, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

In many practices, one of the biggest challenges they face is finding new patients for their practice. In some ways, technology has helped the situation, but in many ways technology has made this a real challenge for doctors.

Some recent data from Accenture Health provides an interesting look at one element of how patients find a medical practice.

When I saw this number I was shocked that it was so low. In the past, this number has been so much higher since finding a doctor from your health insurance company was the simple, logical way to make sure you were choosing a doctor which would take your insurance. Times are a changing.

When you look at the full report and the graph on how people find doctors, we learn even more:

Coming as no surprise is that highly digital patients leverage social media, internet searches and health websites to find a doctor at a much higher rate than those whom are less digital. However, what’s shocking to me is how much less the highly digital patient trusts the medical professional versus those that are less digital.

Not surprising is that friends and family is one of the most important factors for finding a doctor regardless of digital skills. Of course, it’s worth noting that in many cases, social media is really synonymous with friends and family. Social media is just the next generation of friends and family influence and communication.

What’s important to realize about these charts is that patients are quickly shifting from the less digital to the more digital category. So, 5 years from now we’re going to see a massive shift with how people find doctors. Social media, internet searches, health websites, and online ratings and review sites are going to continue to grow and become more important to practices looking for new patients.

What are you doing to prepare for this future?