Pre-deadline comments punctuate meaningful use discussion
The Senate this week voted to expand the number of eligible physicians who might receive incentive payments for the meaningful use of health IT under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. This is welcome news for the wide range of clinicians who have asked for such an expansion, but it’s not the end of the discussion by any means.
And as the March 15 deadline for comments on the proposed meaningful use requirements looms, the CMS heard this week from four CIO members of the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME), who testified before the Implementation Workgroup federal panel on the challenges of implementing EHRs under the current definition outlined in the interim final rule of meaningful use.
“Current reporting of core measures and other required reporting is already cumbersome and resource-intensive and we are concerned about the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' (CMS) new increased reporting requirements for both the quality and functional measures for meaningful use and the resulting burden it could place on the organization,” testified Mitzi G. Cardenas, vice president and CIO of Kansas City-based Truman Medical Centers.
Along somewhat the same lines, Rick Pollack, executive vice president of the American Hospital Association offered an alternative approach for the definition of meaningful use, including the addition of 12 objectives to the CMS. The different approach was outlined in a letter Pollack sent to Charlene M. Frizzera, acting administrator for CMS. “The AHA appreciates [the goals] CMS is trying to achieve,” wrote Pollack. However, he recommended that CMS identify a single, expanded set of meaningful use objectives to be achieved between 2011 and 2017.
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) also weighed in: Partial adoption of meaningful use of health IT should result in the receiving of partial fiscal incentives, AAFP Board Chair Ted Epperly, MD, wrote in a letter to Frizzera.
“… We believe that certain aspects in the details of these regulations are unworkable, excessive or redundant and will actually impede on the very goals of the legislation.”
The AAFP made several recommendations “to strengthen and improve the meaningful use regulations.” They include: offering a partial incentive for partial meaningful use, to increase the number of providers who would attempt to comply; and considering parity between Medicare fee-for-service and the Medicaid program’s first year requirements, to enable physicians in small and midsize practices to receive incentive payments according to Medicaid requirements for either program.
With thousands of comments to sift through, CMS will have its work cut out for it to complete the final meaningful use requirements this spring. However, as David Hunt, MD, FACS, chief medical officer and acting director of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology has noted, “Spring doesn't end until the summer solstice, June 21.”
Mary Stevens, Editor
mstevens@trimedmedia.com
And as the March 15 deadline for comments on the proposed meaningful use requirements looms, the CMS heard this week from four CIO members of the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME), who testified before the Implementation Workgroup federal panel on the challenges of implementing EHRs under the current definition outlined in the interim final rule of meaningful use.
“Current reporting of core measures and other required reporting is already cumbersome and resource-intensive and we are concerned about the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' (CMS) new increased reporting requirements for both the quality and functional measures for meaningful use and the resulting burden it could place on the organization,” testified Mitzi G. Cardenas, vice president and CIO of Kansas City-based Truman Medical Centers.
Along somewhat the same lines, Rick Pollack, executive vice president of the American Hospital Association offered an alternative approach for the definition of meaningful use, including the addition of 12 objectives to the CMS. The different approach was outlined in a letter Pollack sent to Charlene M. Frizzera, acting administrator for CMS. “The AHA appreciates [the goals] CMS is trying to achieve,” wrote Pollack. However, he recommended that CMS identify a single, expanded set of meaningful use objectives to be achieved between 2011 and 2017.
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) also weighed in: Partial adoption of meaningful use of health IT should result in the receiving of partial fiscal incentives, AAFP Board Chair Ted Epperly, MD, wrote in a letter to Frizzera.
“… We believe that certain aspects in the details of these regulations are unworkable, excessive or redundant and will actually impede on the very goals of the legislation.”
The AAFP made several recommendations “to strengthen and improve the meaningful use regulations.” They include: offering a partial incentive for partial meaningful use, to increase the number of providers who would attempt to comply; and considering parity between Medicare fee-for-service and the Medicaid program’s first year requirements, to enable physicians in small and midsize practices to receive incentive payments according to Medicaid requirements for either program.
With thousands of comments to sift through, CMS will have its work cut out for it to complete the final meaningful use requirements this spring. However, as David Hunt, MD, FACS, chief medical officer and acting director of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology has noted, “Spring doesn't end until the summer solstice, June 21.”
Mary Stevens, Editor
mstevens@trimedmedia.com