Posted: September 9th, 2013 | Author: Jodi | Filed under: Basics, In the News, Incentives, Public Policy, Standards | Tags: DoseSpot, e-Prescribing, e-Prescribing Integration, e-Prescribing Software, EHR software, meaningful use | No Comments »
While EHR companies are working to meet Meaningful Use (MU) Stage 2 criteria, industry leaders have been collaborating to develop MU Stage 3 requirements. Last week, the Consumer Partnership for eHealth published an action plan, Leveraging Meaningful Use to Reduce Health Disparities Plan, to leverage MU Stage 3 requirements to reduce health disparities.
According to Healthcare IT News, the proposed action plan:
- Recommends that EHRs have the ability to stratify patients’ specific conditions by variables such as race, ethnicity, language, gender identity, sexual orientation, socio-economic status and disability status.
- Calls for greater use of patient data collected and shared through devices such as smartphones.
- Emphasizes the need to ensure that electronic health information is effectively communicated to patients, so they are better able to utilize its benefits.
The goal is to address health disparities as part of Stage 3 requirements resulting in improved health outcomes and measurement nationwide. Notable statistics surrounding disparities highlighted in the action plan include:
- 58 million people ages five and older speak a language other than English at home
- 56 million people live with a disability
- Women account for 50.8 percent of the population
- The U.S. Hispanic population reached 50.5 million, increasing 43 percent from the year 2000 and accounting for over half of the total population increase in the U.S.
Posted: July 10th, 2013 | Author: DoseSpot | Filed under: Basics, Dental, In the News, Incentives, Public Policy, Standards | Tags: core objective, DoseSpot, e-Prescribing, e-Prescribing Integration, e-Prescribing Software, EHR, EHR software, meaningful use | No Comments »
With Stage 2 right around the corner many EHRs, physicians, dentists, and other ‘eligible professionals’ are seeking guidance. So here it is! Today’s blog post features a Stage 1 vs. Stage 2 Comparison Table for 3 Meaningful Use Core Objectives.
More comparisons are coming…stay tuned!
….Congrats to last week’s DoseSpot #TuesdayTweetup winner @jasmith1437 and runner up @techydoc.
—
Stage 1 Objective: CPOE
Use CPOE for medication orders directly entered by any licensed healthcare professional who can enter orders into the medical record per state, local and professional guidelines
Stage 1 Measure:Â CPOE
More than 30% of unique patients with at least one medication in their medication list seen by the EP have at least one medication order entered using CPOE
Stage 2 Objective:Â CPOE
Use computerized provider order entry (CPOE) for medication, laboratory and radiology orders directly entered by any licensed healthcare professional who can enter orders into the medical record per state, local and professional guidelines
Stage 2 Measure:Â CPOE
More than 60% of medication, 30% of laboratory, and 30% of radiology orders created by the EP during the EHR reporting period are recorded using CPOE
—
Stage 1 Objective: e-Prescribing
Generate and transmit permissible prescriptions electronically (eRx)
Stage 1 Measure:Â e-Prescribing
More than 30% of unique patients with at least one medication in their medication list seen by the EP have at least one medication order entered using CPOE
Stage 2 Objective:Â e-Prescribing
Generate and transmit permissible prescriptions electronically (eRx)
Stage 2 Measure:Â e-Prescribing
More than 50% of all permissible prescriptions written by the EP are compared to at least one drug formulary and transmitted electronically using Certified EHR Technology
—
Stage 1 Objective: Record Demographics
Record demographics: Preferred language, Gender, Race, Ethnicity, Date of birth
Stage 1 Measure:Â Record Demographics
More than 50% of all unique patients seen by the EP have demographics recorded as structured data
Stage 2 Objective:Â Record Demographics
Record demographics: Preferred language, Gender, Race, Ethnicity, Date of birth
Stage 2 Measure:Â Record Demographics
More than 80% of all unique patients seen by the EP have demographics recorded as structured data
Source:Â http://go.cms.gov/12r3Gsc
Posted: September 13th, 2012 | Author: Greg | Filed under: Basics, In the News, Incentives, Public Policy, Standards | No Comments »
Get those reading glasses on…Meaningful Use Stage 2 released!
Below are some resources to jumpstart your research:
Executive Summary by HIMSS
 ONC Fact Sheet by ONC for HIT
 Final Rule by HHS
 6 Highlights from CMS’ Final Stage 2 Meaningful Use Rule by Becker’s Hospital Review
Meaningful Use Stage 2 Rules Finalized by InformationWeek
 At a glance: Stage 2 Final Rule by Healthcare IT News
 ICSA Labs Free MU2 Webinars by ICSA Labs
Enjoy!
Posted: October 28th, 2009 | Author: George Getty III | Filed under: Incentives | No Comments »
One of the barriers in the swift adoption of electronic prescribing is the high switching cost associated with migrating from paper to e-format, but several studies have shown the investment is worth the potential savings in the future.
A study based on e-prescribing in Massachusetts found that doctors who used e-prescribing systems could save $0.70 per patient per month, which translates to $845,000 annually per 100,000 insured patients filling prescriptions.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: September 23rd, 2009 | Author: George Getty III | Filed under: Incentives | No Comments »
In its bid to entice more providers to shift to electronic prescribing, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has started this year incentive payments of up to 2 percent to physicians and other eligible professionals who use the technology
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
Beyond
|
Incentive |
2%
|
2%
|
1%
|
1%
|
0.5%
|
None
|
Penalty |
None
|
None
|
None
|
1%
|
1.5%
|
2% |
For 2009, to be a “successful e-prescriber,†eligible professionals must report the e-prescribing quality measure through their Medicare Part B claims on at least 50 percent of applicable cases during the reporting year.
Read the rest of this entry »