Ortho society endorses EHR\EMR adoption, with reservations
Access to and correct usage of patient EHRs\EMRs provide major benefits to patients and physicians alike, according to the newly adopted American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons’ (AAOS) position statement on EHRs\EMRs.
“When properly designed and utilized, EHRs\EMRs can improve patient safety, increase clinical efficiency, reduce costs, allow seamless transfer of vital patient information and allow physicians to better use their time and expertise treating patients,” the Rosemont, Ill.-based AAOS wrote.
The AAOS position statement supports the implementation and use of EHRs\EMRs by orthopaedic surgeons, noting the potential for improving the quality of patient care, patient safety and outcomes measurements; however, the statement asserted that “health IT should … not detract time and attention from the care of patients.”
AAOS stated it endorses efforts to encourage the adoption of EHRs\EMRs by physicians and patients, but also believes that unless the standards are appropriate and realistic, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will end up imposing "an untenable and counterproductive burden" on physicians that may disrupt the patient-physician relationship and access to care.
"Therefore, it is essential that physicians from many specialties and clinical practices be involved in the discussions and deliberations; otherwise, the appropriate and laudable goal of universal EHR\EMR adoption will be thwarted," the statement warned.
The AAOS believes the following standards are essential for the successful development of meaningful use standards and EHR\EMR systems certification:
The statement also called vendors to arms to “consider the specific practice workflows and needs of orthopaedic surgeons in developing, implementing and maintaining EHR\EMR systems.”
“[Physicians should] weigh the benefits versus the risks and costs and take into account the fact that in the near future, payors will likely make EHR\EMR a requirement for network participation,” the statement concluded. While recommending the adoption of well-designed EHRs\EMRs, AAOS suggested physicians take time to find "the system most appropriate in terms of functionality and cost for their practices [and] that payors and government agencies recognize variations in system capabilities in setting standards, incentives and penalties.”
“When properly designed and utilized, EHRs\EMRs can improve patient safety, increase clinical efficiency, reduce costs, allow seamless transfer of vital patient information and allow physicians to better use their time and expertise treating patients,” the Rosemont, Ill.-based AAOS wrote.
The AAOS position statement supports the implementation and use of EHRs\EMRs by orthopaedic surgeons, noting the potential for improving the quality of patient care, patient safety and outcomes measurements; however, the statement asserted that “health IT should … not detract time and attention from the care of patients.”
AAOS stated it endorses efforts to encourage the adoption of EHRs\EMRs by physicians and patients, but also believes that unless the standards are appropriate and realistic, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will end up imposing "an untenable and counterproductive burden" on physicians that may disrupt the patient-physician relationship and access to care.
"Therefore, it is essential that physicians from many specialties and clinical practices be involved in the discussions and deliberations; otherwise, the appropriate and laudable goal of universal EHR\EMR adoption will be thwarted," the statement warned.
The AAOS believes the following standards are essential for the successful development of meaningful use standards and EHR\EMR systems certification:
- Establish EHR\EMR standards by the collective wisdom of physicians actively caring for patients;
- Establish phased implementation with sufficient incentives over several years, rather than a single, hard deadline with non-adoption penalties;
- Establish a comprehensive set of certification standards, including data and interoperability standards for all EHR\EMR systems;
- Establish implementation thresholds rather than requiring implementation of all meaningful use criteria as an all-or-nothing requirement that will serve to discourage, not encourage, adoption of EHR\EMR;
- Recognize the different needs and uses of EHR\EMR by disparate medical specialties, especially the differences between surgical specialties and primary care specialties;
- Create meaningful use criteria that are HIPAA-compliant, protect patients’ privacy, and provide safe harbors so as not to expose physicians and other healthcare professionals to penalties for unintended HIPAA violations;
- Recognize that many aspects of EHRs\EMRs such as interaction with government, private payors, labs, patients, pharmacies and physicians are still in development and therefore, criteria requiring interoperability for the sharing of data may not be attainable for reasons beyond the control of physicians; and
- Recognize the cost burden of adoption of EHR\EMR, particularly for small private practitioners and practitioners in rural areas.
The statement also called vendors to arms to “consider the specific practice workflows and needs of orthopaedic surgeons in developing, implementing and maintaining EHR\EMR systems.”
“[Physicians should] weigh the benefits versus the risks and costs and take into account the fact that in the near future, payors will likely make EHR\EMR a requirement for network participation,” the statement concluded. While recommending the adoption of well-designed EHRs\EMRs, AAOS suggested physicians take time to find "the system most appropriate in terms of functionality and cost for their practices [and] that payors and government agencies recognize variations in system capabilities in setting standards, incentives and penalties.”