Welcome to EMR and EHR

Today we got news of the new ONC-ATCB EHR certifying bodies: CCHIT and Drummond Group. However, this is really just the start of the EHR certifying bodies. ONC released that “Applications for additional ONC-ATCBs are also under review.”

One of those possible additional ONC-ATCB EHR certifying bodies is Weno Healthcare. This EMR Daily News guest blog post (Thanks Michelle for pointing it out) asserts that Weno Healthcare has submitted their application to be an ONC-ATCB EHR Certifying body. They also offer this interesting insight:

Until recently, only one body was promoted to do this testing and certification. Because of no competition, their prices were out of the ballpark for smaller technology companies who may have built the better and cheaper mouse trap for doctors and hospitals, but could not afford the fees for certification. The technology companies that certified their products earlier are not considered certified by the new rules today, so all technology vendors must go through an ONC-ATCB in order to be re-tested and certified, if they choose to do so.

If Weno is approved as an ONC-ATCB, more technology vendors can afford the testing and certification fees. Weno savings can be as much as $19,000 for complete EHRs. These savings will certainly provide physicians and hospitals with more cost effective certified technology options to choose from. Again, competition is a good thing because it brings prices down and quality up.

Comparing the Weno Healthcare EHR certification price above with the CCHIT and Drummond Group EHR Certification prices, it’s going to be really interesting. That puts the costs of EHR certification (not counting software development costs) at:
Weno Healthcare: $14,000-18,000
Drummond Group: $19,500
CCHIT: $33,000

Of course, this assumes that Weno Healthcare becomes an ONC-ATCB and that the prices don’t change. I won’t be surprised if they do change. Plus, there could be other EHR certifying bodies.

If you’ve read this blog and/or EMR and HIPAA, you’re quite familiar with my feelings about CCHIT. I just don’t see the value that they add for doctors. If they could show me how they help doctors and not just EMR vendors who want a third party validation to sell more product, then I’d be willing to change my mind. But I digress…

Looks like with the new head of CCHIT Karen Bell taking the reigns, the CCHIT blog has mostly gone quiet. Mark Leavitt did post a good bye on his last day. Sadly, not a single person commented on that blog post saying thank you, best of luck, or anything. So much for 1723 readers subscribed to their blog. I honestly feel a little bad that no one commented. While I disagreed with many opinions that Mark and CCHIT represented, Mark always seemed like a very sincere guy that did care.

Besides that, there’s a post about preparing for the EMR stimulus, but it just links to an outside article. Maybe they should link to some of my articles or even my EMR selection e-Book. I bet they’d like that.

I can imagine how frustrating the EMR stimulus must be to them. Not to mention HHS’s inability to finalize the details of EHR certification bodies and meaningful use. They are kind of in a wait and see pattern until HHS finishes their work.

CCHIT did put out a new search tool. I’m just glad they’re not developing EMR software. Their search tool is one of the most confusing things I’ve seen. At least the lists were easy to understand (once I found them).

We’ll see if CCHIT starts blogging again once HHS gives us some meaningful details.

In case you missed it, I posted on my other site about the NIST EHR Certification testing website. I still haven’t had much time to dig deep into what’s available, but one of my readers sent me the following (excuse the lack of form since they probably didn’t intend it to be published):

Boy, I don’t know what to think. Much of this seems to be piles of words referring to zillions of links.

However, I did find a place where it talks about the “Draft Test Procedures.” Under that heading it lists the “Draft Test Method” for a category such as Maintain Active Medication List. It shows, for instance, that you must be able to enter something like:

RxNormCode Medication Brand Name (generic name) Dose Form Route Frequency DateStarted DateStopped
205875 Diabeta (glyburide) 2.5 mg Tablet By mouth(po) every morning 9/16/09
617314 Lipitor (atorvastatin calcium) 10 mg Tablet By mouth(po) daily 5/5/08

and then modify, and later list. So, I guess if a system didn’t have the ability to enter “route” then does this mean the system fails? Or, does allowing an improper form of “route” for the med make it fail? Unclear. On the other hand, because you can enter and modify all of the above, does it “pass”? What is missing, from my opinion, is the useability factor. My docs, for instance, like to see the history of dispensing of a given medication. Knowing and being able to easily see the various dispensings of amoxicillin is key to practicing good medicine. The Draft does not address that and is, in my opinion, a major missing point. One can have a system where doing anything takes lots of clicks and typing, or common things can be done in a few steps.

The rest of the Draft Test Methods are the same. Enter this, change that, make a list.

It would be nice if someone could tell me what it is I’m missing.

Does anyone else get the feeling that this certification stuff is going to be a mess and add little value for doctors?

A while back I wrote about the great news that the Drummond Group was planning to compete with CCHIT in doing EHR certification. The news coming out of HHS has been slow coming for these new EHR certification bodies, but I just received this email from the Drummond Group. In it they assert that they’re still planning to become an EHR certifying body for purposes of getting EMR stimulus money. Below is the full email:

As our 2009 year closes, we wanted to reach out to the many EHR vendors and interested parties who have contacted us about EHR certification and update you on the current state of our EHR certification program. Like you, we are currently waiting for HHS to release their meaningful use definitions and, just as importantly, their certification requirements. In his recent blog post (http://healthit.hhs.gov/blog/onc/index.php/2009/12/07/marking-the-road-ahead/), Dr. Blumenthal of the ONC indicated the publishing of the plans for the new certification program will not be released until early 2010. This is a bit disappointing as we were expecting this in late 2009. Regardless, we remain very excited about the future of EHR certification.

In this period of waiting, we have been speaking to many industry leaders and stakeholders to gain as much information as we can to ensure our EHR certification program will meet the needs of end-users and be viable for EHR vendors, especially small and medium sized companies. Once we get news of the HHS certification program, we can begin formalizing our EHR certification process. When we know more, we will make sure we keep you updated about our plans.

Thank you for your interest in us and EHR certification. May you and yours have a joyous holiday season and an even better 2010.

Joani Hughes
Interop Certification Coordinator
Drummond Group Inc.
www.drummondgroup.com

Healthcare Informatics has been doing a number of really interesting interviews lately. One of their most recent ones is an interview with RiK Drummond, CEO of The Drummond Group. You may have seen that the Drummond Group will be certifying EHR for ARRA funding. So the interview with Rik Drummond is pretty interesting. It is in 2 parts, but here are some highlights from the first part (since the second part isn’t up yet):

In regards to the cost of EHR certification (looks like Drummond Group EHR certification could still be pricey):

GUERRA: So you don’t have a better sense of whether they feel the current pricing is too high or if the certification process is too long? You’re not getting a more definite sense of what it is they’re coming to you for?

DRUMMOND: We’ve been kind of overwhelmed with a lot of this for the last three or four weeks, so we’re going back to interview some of them just to see what the actual problem is. I should know more in probably three or four weeks.

I expect that this is like normal testing where pricing is always an issue. Every test that anyone does, people think it’s too high because it’s one more cost to add in the end. The flipside is we find that once people understand what pricing gives them – it’s almost the last part of their software cycle – they see the cost is not nearly as high as they would anticipate, because it’s a cost of shifting from internal testing to external testing, and it also gives them a big marketing boon because someone is stamping their seal of approval on you, you’ve met these conditions. And that marketing boon is worth anything, you pay for that sort of thing.

In regards to establishing the EHR criteria and CCHIT certification (glad to see they like the separation of requirements making and requirements testing):

DRUMMOND: We think it’s very important to keep the stakeholder groups who define the requirement areas distinct from the testing parts, if at all possible. That doesn’t mean it can’t be the same organization, but it means you have to have some really clear boundaries. So CCHIT has both of those combined, and we always try to avoid having those two combined very closely.

Our focus would be very much on working with CCHIT, our working in parallel with them, but we all have to use exactly the same test criteria to make this whole thing work. So it has to be defined somehow so that happens. We need to focus on the technical aspects in making everything come together appropriately, so that when people go buy these products they can say, “Well, I’m one step into meaningful use. I have one key component in place. Now, I have to show how I use it to get the rest of it.”

There’s been a lot of talk around the blogosphere about the new EHR certification pathways proposed by CCHIT. However, Neil Versel is reporting on his blog that there’s a rumor that ONC is planning a July meeting with several people that are considering starting up an EHR certification program.

Makes complete sense to me. David Blumenthal does seem open to the idea of not having CCHIT be the sole certification body. Certainly he’ll feel some big time pressure from the various big EHR vendors out there, but I’m hopeful that David Blumenthal will be able to do well and keep at least some competition in the EHR certification process.