A few months ago Anthem Blue Cross was talking about pay for performance and HEDIS. They handed out forms for preventative visits for all age groups and sexes, that were based HEDIS measures. I thought, wouldn’t these be great templates to have in an EHR? Then I thought, the CHDP program could be integrated into these forms as well. Then I thought, doctors don’t really practice medicine differently based on who is paying for the service?
I would like to hear what other people are doing around these issues.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
While I would be the first to admit that I don't have a high level of technical expertise when it comes to getting data out of an EMR (Charles is my go-to person for that!), from what I can see of NextGen, if you: design your templates so that you can capture the data you want to capture; train people to input correctly and consistently; design your reports and then test them for accuracy, you should be able to get data according to HEDIS measures or just about any other standard you can think of.
While many FQHCs argue that the primary templates you would want to build are for UDS, I agree that P4P/HEDIS makes for a stronger, more direct business case to make these primary templated measures. But my sense is that any software worth its salt should allow the administrator to create templates of varying shapes and sizes to meet a variety of needs.
I appreciate the responses, and yes I think an EHR should allow us to create whatever we would like.
I guess I was just thinking outloud, why do CHDP requirements differ from HEDIS guidelines which differ UDS measures.
It seems like a lot of people jumping thru different hoops for the same end result(better or atleast consistant care). All the while creating additional costs within the Health Care System.
From a template management stand point, I was thinking a basic template (maybe Hedis), with additional external requirements (CHDP, or you name the grant) as additional items. But the basic core data set remains the same for every patient.
And while I'm on my Friday afternoon rant, will somebody PLEASE get Califonia on a unified immunization registry.
Hey Ray,
With regards to your rant, there may be some good news. It appears that the State is encouraging most of these regional IZ servers to move under one agency umbrella in Sacramento. However, I am told that at this stage this will not be a consolidation but rather, being housed under one roof/room and hopefully linked up better. We continue to send a flat file to Butte County who hosts our regional IZ server and depend on their staff to upload in a timely way our EMR IZ data but there have been problems. What is needed is a direct interface to one server for the whole state. We just got word that Butte will be giving up their server to this consolidated IZ agency in Sacramento. Hopefully the start of something good?!
Post a Comment