I was recently asked by health IT vendor, NaviNet, if I’d be willing to do an interview as part of their “Expert Interview Series.” Since I’m always interested in pontificating about EMR and EHR, I consented. You can find the full interview here.

Here’s one answer I gave that I think really illustrates the key to broad EHR adoption:

You think that will really cause doctors to choose an EHR provider?
I do. I think doctors will talk to other doctors to get first-hand experiences since they’re very social within their own networks. They’ll want to be able to talk to other doctors, hear first-hand experiences. They’ll gravitate to vendors where other doctors say, “Yeah, this is much better for me over using paper.”

Key Message: Doctors Talk!

In the interview, I also suggested three challenges that practices will have in meeting the EHR Meaningful Use requirements:

• The provider didn’t understand the core measure.
• They thought the EHR vendor would do it.
• They thought it was satisfied through HIPAA or something else that they did.

Key Message: Be careful to understand meaningful use properly.

Lots more in the interview, so check out the NaviNet EMR Expert Interview Series for the rest of my answers.

I’m writing to you from the balmy, breezy and absolutely beautiful Palm Springs, where the Porter Research team presented several sessions at this year’s Healthcare IT Summit. It’s my second year attending this conference, unique in that it brings together providers and payers for joint sessions and networking opportunities. I enjoy it because it’s an intimate setting in which to chat with providers about what their challenges are and how they plan to face them. Something you definitely don’t get at big shows like HIMSS. California is a nice change from last year’s chillier venue of Washington, D.C.

Little did I know that casinos are part of the after-hours culture in Palm Springs. Driving in from the airport – the smallest and prettiest I’ve ever been through – I noticed the bright lights of one of them, which reminded me of an article I came across last week regarding the state of Massachusetts’ plans to use anticipated revenue from casinos to accelerate the adoption of electronic medical records. Apparently, 23% of licensing fees from the state’s three casinos and one slot parlor may potentially go to a fund “designated in part to help the state switch to an electronic medical records-keeping system.”

Massachusetts, which already requires nearly everyone to have state health insurance, is doing what many other states have done in terms of leveraging gambling revenues for government projects. I myself have benefited from Georgia’s HOPE scholarship, which is funded from the state’s lottery.

Will other states follow suit? Is this an example of creative thinking on the part of the state government, or is there something amiss with private citizens spending their money in Native American casinos, which the government then takes a chunk out of for its mandated programs? I’ll admit, I’m a bit torn. Do we rah, rah, rah the out-of-the box thinking, or pooh pooh it because it’s too close to the vest?

Judy Hanover at IDC predicted in one of her sessions at the summit that the majority of US providers will be using electronic medical records by the end of 2012, with large physician practices leading the way. According to the US Bureau of Labor and Statistics, there were 661,400 physicians in 2008, with 805,500 projected to be employed by 2018. Even taking into consideration the predicted shortage of physicians, that’s a big number to totally move from paper to digital in just a few years.

I wonder if we’ll see other creative funding ideas pop up – whether they be from the government, private investors, or even payers. A speaker at the summit brought up the notion of taxing soda to encourage folks to be healthy as part of this nation’s move to more coordinated care and more formal accountable care organizations. Could money from programs like that be used for EMR funding? Let me know what you’ve heard and think in the comments below.

There’s a lot of talk in the healthcare industry right now about bringing health management tools to the consumer. Whether it’s apps for your iPhone or iPad, games to play on your Wii, or free-standing health-and-wellness kiosks at your local pharmacy, digital applications seem to the delivery method of choice right now. I think those of us in the healthcare IT industry sometimes take for granted that not everybody in the US has a smartphone, computer or even Internet access, which to me always begs the question: How great are these bright and shiny health apps if the populations that need them most don’t have access to them? And aren’t Meaningful Use and Accountable Care incentives/payments targeted towards government-sponsored healthcare recipients? The most likely patient population to NOT have reliable access to the Internet?

It’s this concept of a digital divide in healthcare that I am starting to believe will truly bend the curve when it comes to absolute interoperability – the secure sharing of information between patient, provider, payer, vendor, government, etc., anytime, anywhere. Only those patients who have access to these digital healthcare technologies will begin to clamor for them at their next doctors’ visits. Only patients’ whose doctors in turn have reached out to them via email, text or social media regarding the switch to electronic medical records, development of health information exchange and the benefits to care these will hopefully bring will be ready and willing to go with the digital flow.

I was intrigued by a recent news story on NPR the other morning that detailed a recently unveiled government plan – the Connect to Compete Initiative – to offer cheaper broadband access and computers to low-income families. The story pointed out that “about one-third of Americans – that would be 100 million people, give or take – do not have Internet access in their homes.” (I’d be interested to know how many of that population are on Medicare or Medicaid, or have no insurance at all.) Participating companies will offer broadband service to eligible families for $10 a month, while others will offer computers for as little as $150.

Further investigating into the story dug up a more detailed report from Reuters, which explained that eligible families will be those who have at least one child enrolled in the National School Lunch Program. According to a recent Commerce Department report on U.S. broadband adoption, only 43 percent of households with annual incomes below $25,000 had broadband access at home, while 93 percent of households with incomes exceeding $100,000 had broadband.

I think this is a step in the right direction, and am pleasantly surprised that it’s being enacted by the government – who got this digital healthcare ball rolling downhill fast in the first place.

As more and more low-income/average/middle-class Americans – or whatever we want to call ourselves – begin to speak out about the systemic inequalities we experience in this country’s financial, healthcare and educational systems, it’s nice to think (naively perhaps) that somebody just might be listening. As we see an increase in adoption of digital technologies in the consumer space, so too do I think we’ll see a correlating increase in adoption of healthcare IT by the providers that care for them.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but ever since David Blumenthal left ONC he’s had plenty of interesting things to say. I think he’s still somewhat cautious, but you can tell he’s given himself more freedom to comment on the state of EHR software and how it could be improved.

One example of this was in Andy Oram’s writeup of David Blumenthal’s speech in Boston a little while back. Here’s one section of Andy’s write up that really hit me (emphasis mine):

Perhaps Blumenthal’s enthusiasm for putting electronic records in place and seek interoperability later may reflect a larger pragmatism he brought up several times yesterday. He praised the state of EHRs (pushing back against members of the audience with stories to tell of alienated patients and doctors quitting the field in frustration), pointing to a recent literature survey where 92% of studies found improved outcomes in patient care, cost control, or user satisfaction. And he said we would always be dissatisfied with EHRs because we compare them to some abstract ideal

I don’t think his assurances or the literature survey can assuage everyone’s complaints. But his point that we should compare EHRs to paper is a good one. Several people pointed out that before EHRs, doctors simply lacked basic information when making decisions, such as what labs and scans the patient had a few months ago, or even what diagnosis a specialist had rendered. How can you complain that EHRs slow down workflow? Before EHRs there often was no workflow! Many critical decisions were stabs in the dark.

Lots of interesting discussion points there, but the one I take away from it is that there’s no such thing as the perfect EMR. Blumenthal is dead on that many doctors have this abstract ideal of what an EMR should be and it will never be that way. Certainly there are benefits to implementing an EMR, but there are also some challenges to using an EMR as well. No amount of programming and design are going to ever change that.

I wish I could find a description I read 4-5 years ago from an EHR vendor talking about the doctors they liked to work with. In it they described that they liked working with doctors who had reasonable expectations of the EHR implementation. They wanted to work with doctors who wanted to go electronic. They wanted to work with clinics that understood that some change was required as part of any IT implementation. From what I can tell, that EHR vendor has basically done just that.

Reminds me of trying to force my kids to do something they don’t want to do. Never seems to end well. Instead, it’s a much more satisfying experience for all when I help them understand why we’re doing what we’re doing. They still don’t like some of the details in many cases, but at least they understand the purpose for what we’re doing.

As long as doctors cling to some abstract ideal of EMR perfection, no EMR vendor will ever be able to satisfy them. A perfect EMR is not reasonable. Just because an EMR doesn’t offer everything that you could dream, doesn’t mean it’s not an incremental improvement over what you’re doing today.

Don’t let the quest for perfection get in the way of incremental improvement. Perfection is more nearly obtained through many incremental improvement than giant leaps.

I was on the phone recently with an insurance company representative, inquiring about their policies, premiums and hidden caveats. During the middle of my call, the rep tells me his computer seems to have frozen up, and that he can’t move forward with answering my questions because he literally can’t move to the next screen containing the answers. “But wait,” he says excitedly, “I do have some paper to read off of.”

I chuckled to myself thinking of how many times physicians have had a similar experience, much to the consternation of electronic medical records (EMRs) vendors. Ah, good ‘ole paper. Healthcare’s last bastion of pre-HITECH document keeping. It’s always there when you need it – if you still have it.

This thinking transitions nicely into the topic of “old-school” technologies physicians should consider before going completely digital with their documentation in the form of an EMR. Culled from several recent and not-so-recent articles (See “10 technologies to embrace before EMRs,” and “HIT Projects You Can Implement Today”), with a few of my own suggestions thrown in for good measure, the list below goes from extremely low-tech to on-the-verge-of-clinical technologies.

1. Copy Machine/Printer Combo
You may laugh at the simplicity, but if a doctor’s computer ever freezes up, a copy of a patient’s paper chart will come in very handy.

2. Fax Server
Again, simplistic in nature, but elemental in sharing data with other offices. Perhaps we’ll see resurgence in fax technology now that the government has eased EMR requirements associated with participation in accountable care organizations.

3. Instant Messaging
So 2008, but still a very effective method of communication amongst an office’s nurses, clinicians and front-desk staff.

4. Email
For the love of Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman, who didn’t have access to such an easy form of communication, set up an email account – at least for the business side of your office. It would be nice if ALL physicians (including my daughter’s pediatrician) had secure email messaging with their patients, but that’s a whole other blog.

5. IT Infrastructure
You’ve got to build the foundation before you can start wiring the house. As John Lynn mentions in the second article referenced above, “Good IT companies will come and do an analysis of your current IT setup for free.”

6. Microsoft Office and Google Apps
As HIT consultant Shahid Shah mentions in the first article referenced above, free tools will help an office get its feet wet before diving into a full-fledged EMR. These two in particular have “dirt simple” documentation management that allows everyone in the office to be on the same page.

7. Document Imaging
Most scanners come with basic imaging software already included, Shah explains, adding that once physicians are good at scanning and paper digitalization, they can move on to “medical grade” document management that can improve productivity.
What other tools would you suggest to providers looking to ease their way into EMR adoption? Please share your comments below.

On my far-too-frequent visits to my younger daughter’s pediatrician, I’ve noticed pristine new monitors and keyboards wrapped up and sitting in the corner of the exam rooms. Over the last six months, there they’ve sat, waiting patiently to be unwrapped and plugged in. “What’s the hold up,” I think? As a parent, I’m hoping this new system will offer the doctors e-prescribing capabilities. As a healthcare IT observer, I’m wondering why what I presume to be an electronic health record (EHR) is taking so long to come out of the box and into operation. Is it a question of resources? Is the facility waiting for a training team to be made available? Is there back-end infrastructure that has yet to be put in place? These are the things I think about while dealing with low-grade fevers and scheduled immunizations.

Needless to say, my interest is always piqued when I come across stories of pediatricians adopting EHRs and/or realizing the benefits of that technology. So when I came across news that Sandhills Pediatrics had received $184,000 in EHR incentives, I was intrigued. The Columbia, S.C.-based practice has been using an EHR from SRS since 2010.

“Even our initially most skeptical physicians became committed SRS EHR users in a very short period of time,” said Kevin O. Wessinger, M.D., president of Sandhills Pediatrics, in the release announcing the pay out. “All fourteen physicians and their staff value the efficiencies that SRS has delivered and the patient care and practice improvements that SRS has facilitated.”

I recently spoke with SRS CEO Evan Steele to learn more about how Sandhills implemented the EMR back in 2010, and the benefits they’ve realized from it.

This being the practice’s first EHR, what prompted them to make the move from paper to digital?
ES: “The driving force was the quality of care Sandhills was providing. With 4 locations and Saturday and Sunday office hours only at the central location, patient chart review was a big challenge. The patient charts that were housed at the satellite offices, because that’s where the patients were normally seen, and so were not available to review for weekend care. Additionally, the practice provides nurse triage in the evenings until 10:00pm and again, the satellite patients’ charts were not available.”

Did you, as the vendor, encounter any barriers to adoption from the Sandhills staff?
“No, we did not encounter any barriers to adoption. Our implementation plan is highly developed and assures 100% adoption. In addition, the Sandhills team’s dedication to success allowed them to achieve their EHR goals. Furthermore, the decision to implement the SRS EHR was driven from the top down. Sometimes the age of the physicians may impact adoptability. At Sandhills, 12 of the 14 physicians are under the age of 50 so they are more computer-savvy and willing to make the change.”

What sort of “extras” do the pediatric practices look for when selecting an EMR?
“Unique to pediatrics are immunizations. The SRS development staff worked closely with Sandhills on immunizations and pediatric growth charts. SRS secured the integration between Sandhills and the World Health Organization, developed a table for displaying and storing vaccine information, and enabled Sandhills to provide this information to their patients in a usable format.

“With a patient population of 57,000, Sandhills had to provide every kindergarten, grade school, and day care with proof of immunization. In the past, the practice had to hand-write 20,000 immunization certificates each year. SRS was readily available to provide a solution to this issue and saved the Sandhills staff many hours of aggravation. SRS created a form that auto-populates the immunization information so now the Sandhills staff no longer needs to hand-write each certificate.

The same process and benefits were developed for growth charts. The SRS EHR provides the patient’s age, and the Sandhills staff only has to enter height and weight, and this information auto-populates on the growth charts.

SRS created efficiencies, which coupled with our uniqueness in allowing physicians to continue to document notes as they are accustomed, has led to a successful implementation and positive EHR experience.”

How have clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction been improved since the EMR was installed?
“Clinical outcomes have improved as the physicians have access to pertinent clinical data at any time from any place. Additionally, the staff is quicker to respond to patient inquiries. They’ve experienced tremendous improvements in efficiencies and patient outcomes as a direct result of using SRS Order Management. Sandhills used to have manual paper tracking of lab tests and now with the SRS EHR, an expected date pops up in the system and if a test is not back by then, an alert is shown calling attention to the fact that it needs to be addressed.

“The patients, especially those seen on the weekends and evenings, have commented that they appreciate the improved and quick service. When they call in to the office with questions and concerns, they are comforted and given peace of mind knowing that the Sandhills’ staff is completely familiar and up-to-date with their situation.”

What do you think will be the next evolution of EHRs for pediatrics?
SRS Development recently unveiled vaccine inventory control. This process is entirely manual now, but the new enhancements will automatically track down the vaccine to the lot number. It’s also a double-check for safety that the lot numbers they have match what’s in computer. This is a double benefit – quality control and inventory control. This new development will especially find favor with the nurses, who are so happy that a daily occurrence that used to take 2 hours will now take 2 minutes.”

There seem to be three big acronyms when it comes to healthcare IT and interoperability – EMR (electronic medical record), HIE (health information exchange) and ACO (accountable care organization). Implementing one does not always necessarily lead to the implementation of another. I’m sure everyone will agree, however, that an EMR most likely leads to connectivity to a HIE, which increases the likelihood of participating in an ACO or coordinated care program. I consider these technologies and concepts to be the interoperability triumvirate, if you will.

Of these three, the HIE seems to have seen its day in the sun. Enthusiasm for the concept and its surrounding technologies – at a fever pitch at tradeshows and in the media last year, in my opinion – seems to have been eclipsed by Meaningful Use incentive payments for EMRs and the general consternation related to ACOs. Which is why my interest was piqued when I came across news from a company called NexJ and its new Health Exchange solution.

In order to learn more about the product, touted by the company as one that “brings together the numerous electronic health records systems and applications that exist within healthcare organizations – many of them old, out-dated legacy systems – into one place so that healthcare providers can deliver better, safer, more comprehensive care,” I reached out to Oz Huner, Vice President of Health Solutions at NexJ Systems.

JD: What type of healthcare facility would be the typical customer for your new HIE solution?
OH: “The NexJ Health Exchange solution facilitates the sharing of patient information between healthcare organizations such as hospitals and healthcare providers, ACOs, HIEs, and public health and government agencies.

“Our customers are choosing our solution because it enables them to move from paper-based workflows to electronic workflows and gain such benefits as complete access to accurate information, improved quality of care and patient empowerment.”

Can you give me a specific example of how this HIE can potentially (or has already) improve patient outcomes at a client facility?
“In a current project we’re working on, NexJ is helping meet the challenges emergency department physicians and staff face by providing timely access to the patients’ primary care provider records when they arrive at the hospital admitting department. The NexJ Health Exchange solution connects the patient’s medical record directly with the emergency department systems, improving information sharing between community health providers and the hospital, and improving patient safety.”

Is there a limit to the number of EMRs and applications that can be connected within the NexJ health exchange?
“No, there is no limit to the number of EMRs and applications that can be connected using NexJ Health Exchange. It is highly scalable and can address the needs of the even largest healthcare organizations.”

Does it work with some EMRs better than others?
“No. NexJ Health Exchange provides open, standards-based integration to any EMR system. Its secure, Web-based portal and flexible architecture enables connectivity with legacy and proprietary systems, support for global messaging standards (HL7v2.x and HL7v3.x), exchanging of clinical document formats (CCR and CCD), and support for multiple standardized clinical terminologies (SNOMED, LOINC).

Based on your interactions with providers, do you feel that more and more are finally coming around to the idea of adopting EMRs and eventually HIEs? Or do you find that many providers still think they aren’t worth the expense?
“It is our opinion that EMRs have historically been of great value to healthcare organizations, but since they’re often siloed, such information technology has not been ubiquitously adopted. As an element of a HIE, however, we believe there will be greater EMR adoption as government incentives and programs encourage healthcare providers across the country make the switch to EMRs. As more physicians move to EMRs and become net receivers of patient information, they will realize the benefits of access to accurate information, improved quality of care and patient empowerment.”

Are you working with any regional extension centers around the country to promote your EMR and HIE solutions?
“Indirectly, yes. Through our partnership with Open Health Tools, NexJ is a member of the Platform Implementation Project (PIP), which is working on an open HIE solution for state agencies. The focus is currently on southeast Texas, but is by no means limited to that region.”

NexJ will be at the Health 2.0 conference in San Francisco next week. If you plan on going, stop by their booth and let me and your fellow readers know what you think about this new health exchange solution. Is HIE the buzzword worth bringing back?

In celebration of National Health Information Technology Week –  proclaimed by President Obama earlier this week in an effort to “urge all Americans to learn more about the benefits of Health IT by visiting HealthIT.gov, take action to increase adoption and meaningful use of Health IT, and utilize the information Health IT provides to improve the quality, safety, and cost effectiveness of health care in the United States – I’m hitting the road and heading to North Carolina.

Actually, it’s pure coincidence that my annual Fall road trip to Charlotte and Chapel Hill coincides with this newly official week of celebratory activities. (You can view a list of events here.) But it did prompt me to ponder the state of North Carolina’s EMR and overall healthcare IT utilization. My first stop was the HIMSS State HIT Dashboard, a handy resource that provides an overview of all 50 states’ utilization of healthcare IT.

According to HIMSS, as of September, 2011, North Carolina has six Health Information Exchanges (HIEs):

•  NC Healthcare Information and Communications Alliance Inc. (NCHICA)
•  Carolina HIE
•  Coastal Connect
•  Western NC Health Network (WNCHN Data Link)
•  Southern Piedmont Partnership for Public Health (SoPHIE)
•  Sandhills Community Care Network

The state’s regional extension center, which assists the state’s physicians with selecting and implementing EMRs, has at this point recruited 50% of the providers in its target group of 3,500 priority primary care providers, according to the NCHICA website. The NCHICA seems to be the main governing/advisory body over the state’s HIT activities. Its 239 member organizations will converge in just over a week at the Grove Park Inn in Asheville for its annual conference and exhibit. The lineup of sessions looks pretty interesting, especially “So You’ve Decided to Implement an EHR, Now What?” I’m sure conference attendees will have a great time at the Brews Cruise as well.

My next stop was Google, where a quick search yielded the fact that North Carolina, and the Duke Center for Health Informatics in particular, is home to MindLinc, an EMR for behavioral health. It is now the world’s largest codified behavioral health database, and provides information for research and benchmarking purposes.

My last stop was YouTube, where I found an interesting video created by Janet Apter, an RN and member of the faculty at the Duke School of Nursing, for Duke’s Doctor of Nursing Practice Program. Entitled “Electronic Health Record – a Promising Solution,” the video shares the perspective of one nurse/patient’s frustration with a lack of interoperability between facilities in the same health system, and makes a simple case for the need for a nationwide EHR system.

This week, I got an announcement from a specialty EMR vendor which seems to be getting decent traction in its market. The company, Health IT Services Group, announced that its Acumen nEHR system for nephrologists had just passed the 1,000-customer mark.

According to the company, Acumen is the only nephrology-specific EHR that is certified by CCHIT and ONC-ATCB.  The company also operates one of the largest CMS-qualified reporting services for doctors participating in the Physician Quality Reporting System, a benefit other specialty EMRs may not offer.

All that being said, the most recent estimate I could find concluded that there were about 8,300 nephrologists in the U.S. as of 2010. So while Acumen’s performance may be impressive — a 12 percent share of your market is always a good sign — there’s a ton of nephrologists who aren’t logged on.

Those who are using other EMRs probably aren’t getting a specialized product. My Web research suggests that most EMRs pitched to nephrologists were built for general medical needs, beefed up with a few templates addressing their clinical issues.

My guess is that most specialties are in a similar position — that they can choose from one or two specialty EMR products or go with a general EMR vendor which has arguably shoehorned a few extra functions into the mix.

Before any vendor reading this gets hot under the collar, bear in mind that I’m not suggesting that companies who don’t specialize solely in a single specialty can’t make a good specialty product.

On the other hand, in all honesty, the scuttlebutt I’ve picked up from Twitter comments, discussion forums and trade pubs (as well as my own interviews) suggests that general EMRs with extra functions/templates just don’t cut it for many specialists.

What all of this says to me is that the market for specialty EMRs has a long way to go before it matures. While most doctors have concluded that EMR adoption is inevitable, many specialists don’t seem to have a broad range of options if they want a system tailored to their needs.  (My sense is that for some reason, the psychiatry EMR market is healthier than most, but I don’t have numbers to back that up, just general observation.)

So, readers, I’m tossing this one out to you. Do you think the EMR market will grow increasingly specialized — as one might expect in other markets  – or will the products made by broad-based EMR vendors become sophisticated enough to really satisfy specialists?

Q: How many doctors does it take to doom an EMR installation?  A: Only one, even if everyone else wants to change.

OK, maybe that’s too harsh, but it does bring home a key point. When you’re trying to build support for your EMR launch, you’re probably best advised to root out potential naysayers and empower them to the dickens rather than trotting out your cheerleader (whoops, EHR champion) and having them make inspiring speeches.

I was thinking about this the other day at a local professional gathering, when one of the speakers made a remark that stayed with me.  A vendor executive, whose candor impressed the heck out of me, said the following: ”You may not find any champions to drive your EHR installation, but you’ll always get at least one cynic.”

Amen, sister. It’s just human nature. No matter how bright and sparkly your software installation is, you’ll always have someone who just doesn’t like it and roots for it to fail. Unfortunately, if your application is an EMR, that someone may be a physician, who could — depending on their professional and social clout — talk your project into the ground.

Sadly, it’s often the people who know the least about something new that give it the worst rap, and my sense is that EMR projects are no different.

Beware the physician that hangs on the sidelines, slips away early during training sessions and doesn’t ask many questions. You may be more worried about the doctors that complain loudly, and heaven knows you should address their concerns, but sometimes the clinicians who quietly opt out are just as damaging to EHR user morale.

So, at the risk of being a real pain, I invite you to consider this: does your organization face internal dissent from clinicians who haven’t been given the attention they deserve? Are you taking silence for support?  And most importantly, do you have a strategy for making your cynics happy?