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!

If Meaningful Use Were Gone – Perspective from EHR Executive at Modernizing Medicine

Posted on February 3, 2014 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Michael Sherling, MD, in response to the question I posed in my “State of the Meaningful Use” call to action.

If MU were gone (ie. no more EHR incentive money or penalties), which parts of MU would you remove from your EHR immediately and which parts would you keep?

Michael Sherling
Michael Sherling, MD, MBA
Chief Medical Officer and Co-Founder, Modernizing Medicine

What a great question! As both the co-founder of Modernizing Medicine, and a practicing dermatologist that uses EMA, I can appreciate the amount of time and effort it goes into developing MU feature sets, as well as inputting the data in to be a “meaningful user.”

The Top 3 Measures I would remove

  1. Clinical Summaries Provided to Patient
  2. Vital Signs
  3. Clinical Quality Measures

I understand the intent for patients to receive clinical summaries of each visit- but this places an incredible burden on the end user (physicians and office staff) to make sure that each patient has access to their clinical summaries.  For instance, even though we live in the digital age, several of my older patients don’t own a computer or have access to one.  Additionally, these summaries lead to more questions by the patients after the visit has been concluded often times regarding details of the summary that are relatively innocuous.

I have a serious beef with government mandating of Vital Signs.  Health care providers know when it is medically necessary to take vital signs and when it is not.  Those who never take vital signs, because it is unrelated to their scope of practice can claim exceptions, but those who take a few are often stuck between their medical responsibilities and getting an incentive.  In the end, these dermatologists and ophthalmologists wind up taking more blood pressures or measuring the height and weight of their patients unnecessarily to achieve the incentive.  This paradoxically is medically meaningless since dermatologists don’t treat blood pressure, and ophthalmologists don’t often dose weight-based drugs (they like eye drops).

Clinical Quality Measures needs to be renamed to Cost Effective Measures.   Clearly, the goal of CQM is to change physician behavior so that physician decisions are more cost effective.  This is needed in our health care system.  What today is an incentive based on pay for reporting, will be transformed to pay for performance tomorrow.  My concern as a physician is how do we know these are the right questions to ask?  If physicians comply with these CQM guidelines, will that result in not just lower costs, but more effective care?  I’d much rather see benchmarking around actual patient clinical outcomes themselves, using tools like static global assessments of disease rather than a questionnaire about whether or not I followed a recipe for how a committee thinks I should treat every patient with condition Y.

The Top 5 Measures I would Keep

  1. Electronic Prescribing
  2. Medication List
  3. Allergy List
  4. Drug-Drug, Drug-Allergy Interaction Checks
  5. Patient Search

All of these measures are critical to patient care and have obvious benefits.  With electronic prescribing, prescription orders are standardized and LEGIBLE! No need for the pharmacist to discern my own poor doctor handwriting anymore.   Keeping the medication and allergy lists updated and the drug-drug and drug-allergy checks enabled makes for great patient care.  No physician wants to prescribe a medication that interacts with another in a negative way, nor do we want to prescribe a medication that could potentially cross-react with a known allergy. Finally, patient search is a really cool feature that allows all of us to search for patients with specific diseases and medications. This is an important first step in getting records to behave more like research databases for clinical studies and less like word-processors for just note taking.

Health IT Costs, Health IT Adoption, HIE and CommonWell – Pre #HITsm Thoughts

Posted on June 28, 2013 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.

Last week I took the #HITsm Chat topics and created a blog post about Healthcare Unbound. I enjoyed creating the post so much that I decided to do it again this week. Not to mention I’ll be on the road to Utah during this week’s chat and won’t be able to participate. (Side Note: If you live in Utah and want to do lunch, I’d love to meet and talk EMR or health IT. I’ll be in Hawaii in July if you want to do the same.)

The chat topics make perfect discussion items. Plus, I love that I have more of an opportunity to really dig into the topics in a blog post. You can’t dig in quite as much in 140 characters.

Topic 1: Costs vs benefits. Will high costs always be the #1 barrier cited to #healthIT adoption?
We’ve seen an enormous shift in the cost of healthcare IT since I first started blogging about EMR 8 years ago. Cost use to be a much bigger issue when the cheapest EMR software you could find was about $30,000+ per doctor (in the ambulatory space). Plus, they expected you to pay the entire lump sum payment up front (many did offer financing). These days the cost of EMR software has dropped dramatically and fewer and fewer EHR vendors are using the lump sum payment model. This change means that costs are much more in line with a practice’s revenue.

These days, I’d say that those who use cost as the reason for not adopting health IT are really just using it as an excuse not to do it. There are a few rural providers where cost is more than just an excuse, but those are pretty few and far between. I’m not saying that cost isn’t an important part of any health IT project, but I’ve most often seen cost used as a mask for other reasons people don’t want to implement health IT. The most common reason is actually just a general resistance to change.

Topic 2: Why does ePrescribing have such widespread acceptance while #telehealth adoption is so low?
If providers could be reimbursed for telehealth, adoption would be high.

It is ironic that doctors don’t really get reimbursed for ePrescribing, but they do it at a high level. Although, the doctor does get reimbursed for the visit that generates the need for the prescription. A deeper investigation of why ePrescribing has had good adoption would be interesting. Certainly there are many doctors who miss their sig pad. However, once you have to record the prescription in the EHR, you might as well ePrescribe it.

Plus, there are some obvious reasons why ePrescribing is better. Whether it’s replacing the unreadable prescriptions or the drug to drug and allergy interaction checking that’s built into every ePrescribing platform, the benefits can be understood quickly.

The sad thing is that the benefits of Telehealth can be seen quickly as well, but you can’t get paid to do it.

Topic 3: #HIE as a noun or a verb? Does negative press for HIE org$ hinder health data exchange as a whole?
HIE is currently more of a noun than a verb. Verbs require action and we’re not seeing enough HIE action.

In some ways negative press could discourage healthcare organizations from participating in an HIE organization. However, negative press about HIE’s weaknesses can also put pressure on healthcare organizations to finally step up to the plate and have more HIE action and less HIE talk.

The biggest hindrance to HIE is business model, and good or bad press won’t do much to change that.

Topic 4: Is #CommonWell just a bully in a fairy godmother costume?
I love this question mostly because I sent the tweet that inspired it. Although, a smart health IT PR/marketer was the one who said it to me.

It’s a little too early to tell if the fairy godmother costume that CommonWell has on is real or fake. I think there path is paved with good intentions, but will the almighty dollar get in the way of them realizing these good intentions? I don’t know. I’m hopeful that it will be a success. I’m also glad that at least the conversations are happening. That’s a step forward from where we were before CommonWell.

Topic 5: Open forum: What #HealthIT topic had your attention this week?
There are so many topics that I discuss each week, but I think I’m most excited by the project announced this week to create a Common Notice of Privacy Practices. I hope their crowdfunding is successful and they get a lot of great healthcare organizations on board with what they’re doing. I also found the Vitera Healthcare acquisition of Success EHS quite interesting. EMR is slowly but surely consolidating.

Hardest Meaningful Use Measure

Posted on December 21, 2012 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.

There was a great piece a while back by Benjamin Harris that looked at the 5 not-so-easy pieces of meaningful use stage 2. In the article he suggests the following 5 challenges:

1. Structured Lab Results
2. Patient Access to Health Information
3. Ongoing Submission to Registries
4. Computerized Order Entry (CPOE)
5. Summary of Care Referrals

I started asking around my network to see what readers of my site and those in my social media groups thought was the hardest meaningful use measure for them. Some of them match the list above, but I thought I’d highlight a few of them I found interesting.

One person told me that the multi-lab scenario might be one of the most challenging parts of meaningful use and one that doesn’t get talked about much.

A CIO named Renee Davis told me that ePrescribing and monitoring compliance were the hardest meaningful use measures. I think the ePrescribing part can be a huge challenge depending on your EHR vendor, your physician users, and your location (ie. Do your local pharmacies participate?). Plus, any CIO will definitely have challenges with compliance.

Patty Houghton suggested that Clinical Summaries and Problem Lists were her hardest meaningful use challenges.

Obviously when you say the word “hardest” it’s something that’s unique to an individual practice or institution. With that disclaimer, from the large number of people I’ve talked to I think that most people consider the 60% CPOE meaningful use measure the hardest.

I still remember the day when I heard Marc Probst, CIO of Intermountain Healthcare (IHC), say that IHC was doing ) CPOE. This was when he was first working on the committees in Washington to create EHR certification and meaningful use requirements. It was a shock to me that IHC, who is touted for its use of IT in healthcare, could have 0 CPOE (I think Meaningful Use has helped encourage them to remedy this number). It illustrated well how much of a challenge CPOE will be for many institutions.

What’s your experience and the experience of the doctors and hospitals you work with? Which meaningful use measures are most challenging?

Can Health IT Reduce Readmissions?

Posted on August 15, 2012 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.

We who work around health IT know it can do some great tricks, but it’s always nice to see examples of how it can actually save money.  One example of how health IT can be a cost-saver is in helping to reduce readmissions, according to a new study from CSC.  Here’s a summary of how it might work, courtesy of CMIO magazine:

Reducing readmissions will require identifying patients at risk for readmission, carefully orchestrated care management programs and patient-specific transition pathways. While this type of patient tracking, collaboration and patient-centeredness has been historically difficult to achieve, health IT should enable more organized care management through tools such as e-prescribing, master patient indexes and electronic clinical communication.

The report notes, however, that this works much better if hospitals and health systems have integrated EMRs that extend from the facility into community medical practices.  And that’s just common sense. After all, hospitals aren’t equipped to check on patients regularly once they’re discharged, aside perhaps from a few that are experimenting with remote monitoring.

The thing is, given that hospitals and medical practices are seldom running the same systems, it’s unlikely (OK, almost impossible) that they’ll be able to share much in the way of digital information. Sure, they’ll get faxes galore, but if that was an efficient way to share docs we wouldn’t be having these conversations.

Oh well. It’s always good for deep thinker types to point the way ahead. Unfortunately, I think we’ll have to wait a while for coordinated care planning via health IT to really find its place. Maybe John’s predictions for Direct Project will help us get part of the way there.

e-Prescribing: Some Considerations

Posted on February 13, 2012 I Written By

Priya Ramachandran is a Maryland based freelance writer. In a former life, she wrote software code and managed Sarbanes Oxley related audits for IT departments. She now enjoys writing about healthcare, science and technology.

I’m always in the mood for stories, which is why I love the Cases and Commentaries section on the AHRQ WebM&M site. There’re a bunch of February posts up there but the one that caught my eye was one titled E-prescribing: E for Error?

The case involved a 63 year old man who went in to see his primary care physician. He was receiving psychotherapy, but was still prone to anxiety. The PCP prescribed him alprazolam for the anxiety. Since the clinic had just implemented a new e-prescribing system, the doctor assured the patient that he didn’t need a paper prescription and just needed to show up at pharmacy and pick up his order.

So far so good.

Back at the doctor’s office, a nurse entered the presribed medication into the practice’s shiny new system, except that she inadvertently added an order of atenolol, intended for a different patient, to this patient’s order. She soon realized her mistake and deleted the atenolol order.

When the patient went to the pharmacy, he was given both the alprazolam and the atenolol, which he thought was odd, since he had been prescribed only one medication. However, he just went ahead with taking both medications per the directions handed to him by the pharmacist, and it was only a few days later, during an appointment with a cardiologist that the mistaken atenolol addition was finally identified.

Fortunately, the patient lived to tell the tale, which we all know is not the outcome in some sad cases. Elisa W. Ashton, the author of this Cases and Commentaries piece, has some great points listed as her takeaways from this case. Here are mine:

It’s too soon to say goodbye to paper. I worry about trees more than the average Jane, but if there’s a ever a case to be made for a paper prescription, here it is. A paper prescription would’ve shown up the double prescription both to the nurse, as well as the patient, making it less likely to make it to the pharmacy.

It’s not clear who/what failed. Did the nurse realize delete the wrong entry only after she transmitted the patient’s prescription? Did the prescription software trule delete the medication or simply mark it as flagged for deletion?

– This accident happened on a newish system, perhaps users were not as familiar with it as they should have been.

If you think something’s odd about your prescription, speak up. As patients many of us tend to assume that doctors know best. However, doctors are as human as everyone else, no matter how many initials tag along before or after their names. You don’t have to be obnoxious about it, it’s perfectly fine to verify politely with your doctor’s office if the additional (or missing) medications are necessary.

– Bravo to the eagle-eyed cardiologist! It was great someone caught this error in time, though I would much prefer that some kind of check system be built into the e-prescription system to prevent errors of this sort.

Go check out the post on AHRQ.

A Report on ePrescribing Challenges

Posted on November 28, 2011 I Written By

Priya Ramachandran is a Maryland based freelance writer. In a former life, she wrote software code and managed Sarbanes Oxley related audits for IT departments. She now enjoys writing about healthcare, science and technology.

From the Center for Studying Health System Change (hschange.com) comes a study on e-prescriptions, and how providers and pharmacies work together to electronically transmit and fulfill prescriptions. Now, I don’t know how reliable this organization or its research is (the .com in its name, for example, is something that bothers me. Also the report focuses almost exclusively on SureScripts). But the study is interesting to me for what it reveals statistically.

HSChange.com conducted 114 phone interviews with 24 physician practices, 48 community pharmacies, divided between local and national companies. The national respondents included 3 mail-order pharmacies, and 3 chain pharmacy headquarters. Those of you who are interested in the numbers, the methodology and other sundries, go ahead and read the report in its entirety. Here’s a quick summary from the report’s results the rest of us. My comments are bolded.

According to the report:
Two-thirds of the practices sent at least 70% of their prescriptions electronically. Which means about 46.2% of the prescriptions are e-prescribed. Plenty of room for growth, methinks.

Pharmacists at more than 50% of Community said their pharmacies received less than 15% of their prescriptions electronically. The reasons: providers didn’t transmit electronically, or sent out computer-generated prescriptions by fax or mail. Interesting – could be indicative of either lack of knowhow, or infrastructure that allows for e-transmission.
New prescriptions are more likely to be e-prescribed than prescription refills (renewals). The report states that many pharmacies don’t use this feature in order to avoid SureScripts fees for renewals.

There are plenty of inefficiencies. E.g. a) multiple requests for the same prescription were sent (say by phone, fax and through SureScripts) by pharmacies b) providers mistakenly deny prescriptions and then re-send the same prescription as a new one.

E-prescribing to mail order pharmacies is a different process – (apparently providers need to be Surescripts certified to e-prescribe with community pharmacies, and also need to be certified to e-prescribe to mail order pharmacies. So, even when a provider selects a mail order pharmacy to fulfill an e-prescription, the prescription is delivered by fax to the the mail order pharmacy by Surescripts.)
Prescription specificity falls on the provider – tablets, capsules, and liquid formulations might have different costs. Pharmacists can’t change the prescription from a capsule to a tablet on their own, without consulting with the prescribing provider. This might result in unexpected costs.
Providers’ patient instructions are still incomprehensible! Pharmacists often have to play translator (maybe because as the report alludes to, the instructions are intended for pharmacist eyes, not the patient.)

an independent pharmacist explained, ‘A lot of times we can’t copy the directions word for word because the patient doesn’t understand them, just like with paper prescriptions. We have to go in and erase ‘t.i.d.’ and put in, ‘One tablet three times a day’.’

 

Sandhills Paves the Way for Successful Pediatric EMR Implementations

Posted on October 13, 2011 I Written By

As Social Marketing Director at Billian, Jennifer Dennard is responsible for the continuing development and implementation of the company's social media strategies for Billian's HealthDATA and Porter Research. She is a regular contributor to a number of healthcare blogs and currently manages social marketing channels for the Health IT Leadership Summit and Technology Association of Georgia’s Health Society. You can find her on Twitter @JennDennard.

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.”

101 Tips to Make Your EMR and EHR More Useful – EHR Tips 31-35

Posted on October 12, 2011 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.

Time for the next entry covering Shawn Riley’s list of 101 Tips to Make your EMR and EHR More Useful. I hope you’re enjoying the series.

35. CPOE is important, but every EMR will have it.
I think that the CPOE discussion hit a head for me when I saw the CPOE requirements that were baked into meaningful use. Then, I heard someone from the often lauded (appropriately so) IHC in Utah who said that IHC didn’t have CPOE and it would be hard for them to meet that benchmark. Ok, so I’m more of an ambulatory guy than I am hospital, but this surprised me. In the clinics I’ve helped with EHR, CPOE is one of the first things we implemented. No doubt that every EMR has CPOE capabilities.

34. Make sure adverse drug events reporting is comprehensive
Yes, not all drug to drug, drug to allergy, etc databases are created equal. Not to mention some EHR vendors haven’t actually implemented these features (although, MU is changing that). I’d really love for a doctor and an EMR company to go through and rate the various drug database companies. How comprehensive are they? How good can you integrate them into your EHR? etc etc etc.

33. Make certain drug interactions are easy to manage for the physician
I won’t go into all the details of alert fatigue in detail. Let’s just summarize it this way: You must find the balance between when to alert, what to alert, how to alert and how to ignore the alert. Plus, all of the opposites of when not to alert, what not to alert, and how to not ignore the alert.

32. Ensure integration to other products is possible
Is it possible that you could buy an EMR with no integration? Possibly, but I have yet to see it. At a bare minimum clinics are going to want to have integration with lab software and ePrescribing (pharmacies). That doesn’t include many of the other common interfaces such as integration with practice management systems, hospitals, radiology, etc. How well your EMR handles these integration situations can really impact the enjoyment of your EHR.

31. Ensure information sharing is easy
This tip could definitely be argued, but I believe we’re headed down the road of information sharing. It’s going to still take a while to get to the nirvana of information sharing, but we’ve started down the road and there’s no turning back. Kind of reminds me of Splash Mountain at Disneyland where the rabbit has a sign that says there’s no turning back now. My son didn’t like that sign so much and I’m sure many people won’t like that there’s no turning back on data sharing either. However, it’s going to happen.

If you want to see my analysis of the other 101 EMR and EHR tips, I’ll be updating this page with my 101 EMR and EHR tips analysis. So, click on that link to see the other EMR tips.

Subsidiary Modules in Certified EHR Products

Posted on June 2, 2011 I Written By

When Carl Bergman isn't rooting for the Washington Nationals or searching for a Steeler bar, he’s Managing Partner of EHRSelector.com, a free service for matching users and EHRs. For the last dozen years, he’s concentrated on EHR consulting and writing. He spent the 80s and 90s as an itinerant project manger doing his small part for the dot com bubble. Prior to that, Bergman served a ten year stretch in the District of Columbia government as a policy and fiscal analyst.

Carl Bergman, from EHRSelector.com, sent me the following email which poses some interesting questions about various certified EHR vendors and the software that they depend on to be certified.

Many of the [certified EHR] products relied on several other software companies to function. Usually this was Dr. First’s Rocopia, Surescripts, etc. However, many others had required several subsidiary modules to work. For example, Pearl EMR lists: MS .NET Framework 3.5 Cryptographic Service Provider; SureScripts; BCA Lab Interface; Oracle TDE.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but it raises three questions. Does the vendor include the price, if any, for subsidiary software? More importantly, how well integrated are these programs integrated into the main program? Does the vendor take responsibility if the subsidiary software changes making them incompatible?

He definitely asks some interesting questions. I’d say that in most cases, there will be little issues with the dependent software. Any changes by the dependent software are going to have to be dealt with or in some cases replaced by the EMR vendor. That will just be part of the EMR upgrade process that the EMR vendor does for you.

The only exception might be things like the third party ePrescribing software. Depending on how this is integrated it could be an issue. In most cases, integration with the ePrescribing software can be very much like an interface with a PMS system or even a lab interface. If you’ve had the (begin sarcasm) fun (end sarcasm) of dealing with these types of interfaces you know how it can be problematic and often a pain to manage. I believe the interface with an ePrescribing module is less problematic, but it will exhibit similar issues depending on how the EMR software works with the ePrescribing.

Personally, I don’t have much problem with these types of integrations. As long as the EMR vendor is providing all of the software for you. The reason this is important is because if you get the EMR software from one vendor and the ePrescribing software from another vendor and then tell them to work together, you’re just asking for a lot of finger pointing. However, if your EMR software chooses to integrate a third party software to flesh out the certified EMR requirements and provides you all of the software, then you’re in a much better position. As they say, then you only have one neck to ring if something goes wrong. You don’t want to have to call both vendors and have each vendor point the finger at the other. That’s a position that no one enjoys.

Another EMR on the iPad

Posted on November 9, 2010 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.

You know how I love to keep track of all the iPad EMR that are announced or marketed. Seems like the latest trend is to give the doctor a free iPad for selecting an iPad EMR. Not a bad strategy. Now if I could just get one of them to provide me a free iPad for reviewing their EMR *wink* *wink* but I digress.

I first read about this EMR that is available on the iPad on the Essinova site. This iPad EMR is being offered by Dr Chrono. Yes, another EMR vendor I’d never heard of before I saw this. Although, there site has them being on CNBC, Fox Business and The Wall Street Journal.

Dr Chrono’s approach is to provide a free iPad EMR app, but they take over the billing for you. Sounds a bit like Athena to me. They also say that they’re the only SureScripts certified ePrescribing app for the iPad. Maybe this was true when the video was made. I know that now there are others.

I guess maybe the next question is whether there’s an EMR vendor that won’t have something available on the iPad in the next 6 months.