e-Patient Dave (right) while on a panel at Health 2.0

As is well known by now, part of the federal stimulus package included $19 billion for electronic medical records (EMR) implementation — and part of those billions include incentives for physicians and hospital groups that implement EMRs by various deadlines. Of course, the implementation also has to meet a criteria referred to as “meaningful use,” however, the legislation purposefully left out just what “meaningful use” meant.

In the past few weeks, health IT thought leaders have sketched out their own takes on what meaningful use should mean, but only the most recent opinion piece includes an analysis that suggests connected devices and smartphones may have a place in that definition.

Dave deBronkart, also known as ePatientDave, has written an eloquent post on the ongoing debate as to what “meaningful use” should mean for EMR implementation. One of deBronkart’s central points is: “The systems we design today will be in use a long time from now, so I suggest we look at the world as it will be in 2020, and how we’ll be using these systems then.”

deBronkart goes on to emphasize that everything and everyone will be ten years older — you, your parents, your children — and even the Internet will have ten more years of innovation behind it. Our oldest doctors today will be retired or deceased by then, and doctors like Fast Company’s “Doctor of the Future” Jay Parkinson (of Hello Health) will be middle-aged, he writes.

“Handheld computers (smartphones) will be ten years more advanced,” deBronkart writes. “(More advanced? Heck, the iPhone was only introduced 28 months ago.) Connected e-health devices will be out of their infancy: WiFi blood pressure monitors, bathroom scales, glucose monitors, you name it. It’s fairly certain that by then we’ll be able to use cheap devices that send routine data to some central storage place, where smart software (your choice of smart software) can send out alarms or reminders, your care team can view it … and you should be able to view it, too. And make notes on it.”

Predicting the future is no easy task, and deBronkart does a nice job of only hinting at the vision of a more connected health environment in 2020, but decisions makers at ARRA need to decide now whether and (then how) technologies like connected devices should be included as part of the definition for meaningful use.

Above article published on

http://mobihealthnews.com/2164/should-meaningful-use-include-connected-devices/

SCHAUMBURG., The Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology (CCHIT)), the federally recognized body for testing and certifying electronic health records (EHRs), has announced it will develop dermatology-specific functionality criteria beginning in 2009. The CCHIT’s decision was in part a response to an application from the American Academy of Dermatology with support from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, American Telemedicine Association, the Medical Dermatology Society, and the Society for Investigative Dermatology as well as overwhelming support from the dermatology community and other key stakeholders.

“Beginning in 2006, CCHIT has placed a ’seal of approval’ on physician office-based EHR products to indicate that the system has met rigorous functionality, interoperability and security criteria for primary care, child health, and cardiology. The American Academy of Dermatology is pleased that the unique needs of dermatologists — who use digital images and body mapping to track patient health — will be recognized,” said dermatologist C. William Hanke, MD, MPH, FAAD, president of the American Academy of Dermatology. “This will be a service to the health care community as it continues to transition to a system that relies on electronic health records and the smooth and secure interchange of data. Dermatologists are committed to helping create functional criteria and technical elements that also will help many different physician specialties.”

CCHIT will appoint a work group of volunteer providers, payers, health IT vendors and other stakeholders to define those functions that will best help dermatologists enhance patient care quality and safety, improve practice efficiency, participate in clinical research and maintain board certification. In addition to spurring EHR adoption by dermatologists, developing dermatology-specific certification criteria has the potential to facilitate EHR care coordination between and among dermatologists and non-dermatologist physicians in various practice settings. CCHIT is expected to launch the dermatology-specific EHR certification program in 2010.

EHR systems refer to individual patients’ medical records in a digital format. These systems aid with accessing clinical information that can enhance patient care by helping to prevent medical errors, improve quality and facilitate clinical research. EHRs have grown in popularity amongst all physicians including dermatologists. However, barriers such as affordability, reliability, and whether the product will communicate with other electronic systems have kept many physicians from fully embracing these systems.

Headquartered in Schaumburg, Ill., the American Academy of Dermatology (Academy), founded in 1938, is the largest, most influential representative of all dermatologic associations. A sister organization to the Academy, the American Academy of Dermatology Association is the resource for government affairs, health policy and practice information for dermatologists, and plays a role in formulating socioeconomic policies that can enhance the quality of dermatologic care. With a membership of more than 15,000 physicians worldwide, the Academy is committed to: advancing the diagnosis and medical, surgical and cosmetic treatment of the skin, hair and nails; advocating high standards in clinical practice, education, and research in dermatology; and supporting and enhancing patient care for a lifetime of healthier skin, hair and nails. For more information, contact the Academy at 1-888-462-DERM (3376) or www.aad.org.

Many dermatology practices, are using OmniMD EMR to increase the efficiencies and reduce their costs

The medical information age.

With the recent explosion in information and technology over the past twenty years come vast changes throughout every industry worldwide. The medical industry itself has not been exempt from the transition from paper forms of data, to computerized electronic forms. The revolution of converting huge amounts of records, x-rays, names and prescriptions is very time consuming but nevertheless, it must be done. The same thing is taking place in the music business with cd’s being phased out of the market to give rise to mp3’s. Even though it hasn’t happened overnight, it is still a necessary step in the progression of human needs. The difference with the medical field is human lives are what’s at stake opposed to human desires.

Controversy.

Many patients are choosing to be implanted with radio frequency identification (RFID) transmitter inside of their body that stores their entire medical background. Some states have made it mandatory for aids and Alzheimer patients to get the implant for their own good. In the event of an emergency where a patient may be unable to respond to health care workers questions, the information regarding the patient may still be obtained. This controversial technique to store information has forced the entire medical structure to re-examine its own information storage and retrieval procedures. Are health care facilities equipped to handle the ever growing amount of patients in an accurate and timely manner? The answer is yes, however the medical field at large has been slow to adapt. The benefits far outweigh privacy issues that are often discussed surrounding electronic storage of medical records. All computer systems as well as communication methods may be vulnerable to attacks but it certainly doesn’t stop their increased use.

Electronic Medical Records (EMR)

It is no secret that clinical physician assistants prefer electronic medical records over out-dated paper documents. The biggest complaint amongst them is being forced to serve as not only an assistant but a secretary as well. There is just too much administrative work to take care of!

Practitioners who use electronic forms of record keeping are able to almost instantly engage their patients covering vast amounts of data from the computer. Digging in file cabinets, verifying past treatments etc. are rendered obsolete by simply using inexpensive powerful software designed for medical professionals. The rampant prescription drug abuses are being eliminated with multifunction safeguards that allow doctors to know conclusively who they are dealing with at any given moment. Forgeries and similar crimes are easily detected and the decrease in illegal activities lowers overall health care insurance cost.

Conclusion.

Regardless of how any of us may feel about the rise of medical technology and information, it is here to stay. The quicker we learn to utilize it for our advantage the better off we will be.

Above article published on http://www.articlesbase.com/computer-forensics-articles/using-emr-software-in-the-information-age-763158.html

Implications for circumventing studies too costly or unethical for clinical trial

PHILADELPHIA – For years controversy has surrounded whether electronic medical records (EMR) would lead to increased patient safety, cut medical errors, and reduce healthcare costs. Now, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine have discovered a way to get another bonus from the implementation of electronic medical records: testing the efficacy of treatments for disease.

In the first study of its kind, Richard Tannen, M.D., Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, led a team of researchers to find out if patient data, as captured by EMR databases, could be used to obtain vital information as effectively as randomized clinical trials, when evaluating drug therapies. The study appeared online last week in the British Medical Journal.

“Our findings show that if you do studies using EMR databases and you conduct analyses using new biostatistical methods we developed, we get results that are valid,” Tannen says. “That’s the real message of our paper — this can work.”

In January 2009, President Barack Obama unveiled plans to implement electronic medical records nationwide within five years, arguing that such a plan was crucial in the fight against rising health care costs. Of the nearly $900 billion in Obama’s planned stimulus package currently before the United States Senate, $20 billion is proposed for electronic health records.

Tannen says he and his group recognized that the large EMR databases containing compiled medical information could potentially give researchers the ability to study groups reflective of the total population, not just those who participate in clinical trials, and circumvent studies too costly or unethical for clinical trials. However, such databases contain observational information, which critics argue do not offer the same level of control as randomized trials.

“Our study cautiously, yet strongly, suggests that enormous amounts of information within electronic medical records can be used to expand evidence of how we should or shouldn’t manage healthcare,” Tannen says.

To address criticisms of observational studies, Tannen’s group had to first determine a way to use EMR databases for insights on therapy efficacy and then prove the results they found were valid.

Beginning six years ago, Tannen’s team selected six previously performed randomized trials with 17 measured outcomes and compared them to study data from an electronic database — the UK general practice research database (GPRD), which included the medical records of roughly 8 million patients. Treatment efficacy was determined by the prevalence of cardiovascular outcomes, such as stroke, heart attack and death.

After using standard biostatistical methods to adjust for differences in the treated and untreated groups in the analysis of the database information, Tannen found that there were no differences in the database outcomes compared to randomized clinical trials in nine out of 17 outcomes.

In the other eight outcomes, Tannen’s group used an additional new biostatistical approach they discovered that controlled for differences between the treated and untreated groups prior to the time the study began. By using the new biostatistical method instead of the standard approach, the researchers showed there were no differences between the outcomes in the EMR database study compared to the randomized clinical trials.

Though Tannen warns the ability to use EMR databases from the United States to measure the efficacy of therapies will take more than 10 years of national data, he says the results of his study should serve as a catalyst for more researchers to explore the accuracy of the information that can be obtained using EMR database studies.

“An appropriately configured EMR database could offer an invaluable tool, but we need to get to work now on how to configure it properly,” Tannen says. “If we don’t worry about this issue right now and promote a higher investment in the area of EMR research, we’ll lose an opportunity, an enormous health opportunity.”

Mark Wiener and Dawei Xie from Penn are co-authors on this study. This research was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health.

Above Information published originally by University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

The Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS), representing more than 20,000 individual members - of which 73% work in provider settings - and 350 corporate members, today announced its support for the health information technology (IT) provisions in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan of 2009 proposed by Congress. HIMSS believes the inclusion of funding for health IT is essential if we are to meet President Obama’s goal of computerized health records for all Americans by 2014.

HIMSS cites three reasons to support the investment in health IT:

1. The economy will benefit from an investment in health IT

According to research by IBM and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, investing $10 billion in Electronic Health Records (EHR) and other health-related IT projects would create 212,000 jobs.

Furthermore, multiple independent studies have shown substantial return on investment for health IT, which could help lower healthcare costs.

• Deloitte LLP reported this month that investing in e-prescribing and electronic medical records, along with better coordination of patient care through primary-care doctors, would result in 10-year savings of $530 billion.
• The RAND Corporation reported in a 2005 study that widespread health IT adoption (90 percent of hospitals and physicians) could save $77 billion annually. In testimony presented before the Senate Finance Committee on July 17, 2008, RAND forecast that during the 15-year adoption period, cumulative net savings would be about $510 billion or approximately $34 billion per year.
• The Center for Information Technology Leadership estimated in a 2005 study that full implementation of health IT could yield annual savings of $77.8 billion.

2. Patients will benefit from an investment in health IT

When used properly, EHR systems can help keep patients safe by alerting clinicians to harmful drug interactions or allergic reactions to prescribed medicines and helping clinicians manage the health of patients with complex chronic conditions.

Evidence of improvements in patient health associated with IT has been shown:

• The Jan. 26, 2009, issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine includes a study by Johns Hopkins School of Medicine that found a 15 percent reduction in patient mortality rates during hospitalization at centers that use computers instead of paper.
• A 2002 study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association suggests that health IT could reduce the average length of a hospital by reducing delays associated with certain hospital functions and by avoiding costly errors.

3. Doctors will benefit from an investment in health IT

While many physicians realize the positive impact successful EHR implementation can have on a practice, the Congressional Budget Office reported in May, 2008, that as of 2006, only 12 percent of physicians and 11 percent of hospitals have adopted all or most recommended health IT functionalities. Survey results published in the July 3, 2008, issue of The New England Journal of Medicine found that 66 percent of doctors who have not adopted an EHR system cited cost as the biggest barrier to adoption.

In the 2008 study, the vast majority of physicians who have adopted an EHR system are satisfied with the product: 93 percent of physicians who use fully functioning EHR systems reported being generally satisfied with the systems. The same survey results showed that 82 percent of physicians who had fully functional EHR systems reported positive effects of the system on the quality of clinical decisions.

An added benefit for physicians could be lower malpractice insurance costs. The Congressional Budget Office reports that multiple physician liability insurance firms offer discounts to practices that have adopted EHR systems.

“The state of the economy and the healthcare system warrant a significant investment in health IT, especially in light of President Obama’s calls to computerize all health records within five years,” said H. Stephen Lieber, HIMSS president and CEO. “We support the health IT legislation that has been recently introduced and believe it will allow the industry to take important steps toward delivering better quality healthcare more efficiently and at a lower cost.”

In December 2008, HIMSS released A Call for Action: Enabling Healthcare Reform Using Information Technology, outlining specific priorities and recommendations for the Obama Administration and 111th Congress in regards to health IT. The recommendations were developed by more than 100 HIMSS member volunteers and represented necessary measures to develop and sustain a robust health IT infrastructure. The report is available online at www.himss.org/2009calltoaction.

For more information, visit www.himss.org.

About HIMSS

The Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS) is the healthcare industry’s membership organization exclusively focused on providing global leadership for the optimal use of healthcare information technology (IT) and management systems for the betterment of healthcare. Founded in 1961 with offices in Chicago, Washington D.C., Brussels, Singapore, and other locations across the United States and the globe, HIMSS represents more than 20,000 individual members and over 350 corporate members that collectively represent organizations employing millions of people. HIMSS frames and leads healthcare public policy and industry practices through its advocacy, educational and professional development initiatives designed to promote information and management systems’ contributions to ensuring quality patient care.

Contact(s):

Joyce Lofstrom

312-915-9237

In a recent comment by Tom Hamilton, he gave a nice review of a wireless microphone that can be used with Dragon Naturally Speaking Medical. I figured I’d been covering enough EMR politics and implementation lately that it was about time to mingle a little bit of technical content in the middle.

I’ve been told a number of times that if you want to use Dragon Naturally Speaking medical, then finding a high quality microphone is absolutely essential to a quality voice recognition experience. Check out Tom’s review of the Samson Stage 5 Wireless microphone. Wireless is definitely the future.

Samson Stage 5 Wireless Microphone With Dragon NaturallySpeaking Review:

We’ve just completed Phase 3 testing of the new Samson Stage 5 wireless microphone [$99 on Amazon] and you can read our complete review by clicking Samson Stage 5 Review but the short version is that the new Samson Stage 5 wireless VHF microphone combo includes both a lapel microphone and a headset microphone, costs $99-$105 and is as accurate as our best (starting at $115) theBoom “O” [$149.99 on Amazon] and $145 Sennheiser ME3 wired microphones [$135.83 on Amazon] which cost more and are not wireless. The Stage 5 even includes a three-year warranty. With the exception of end users who require extreme portability, we can’t imagine why anyone would want to pay extra for a wired microphone with a one or two-year warranty. Now everyone can afford to cut the cord!

KnowBrainer, Inc. Support Staff – Tom Hamilton
A Nuance Gold Certified Endorsed Vendor
ALWAYS Ask If Your Speech Recognition Vendor Is Nuance Certified

Thanks Tom for the review.

Check out the following prices for the various versions of DNS on Amazon:
Dragon NaturallySpeaking 10 Preferred - Currently $151.49 with $50 rebate ($101.49 after rebate)
Dragon NaturallySpeaking 9 Preferred - Currently $92.97
I’m still looking around for the best location to buy Dragon NaturallySpeaking Medical.

Source from emrandhipaa.com