ScienceDaily — A new framework of recommendations created by health informatics researchers may help doctors and hospitals prepare for a federal initiative to expand the use of electronic health records (EHRs).

The recommendations from faculty at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, the Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine appear in a commentary in the Sept. 9 edition of JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association.

“With high-quality, well-designed, and carefully implemented systems, highly-reliable, safe health care will be achieved,” said Dean Sittig, Ph.D., commentary author, associate professor at The University of Texas School of Health Information Sciences at Houston and member of The University of Texas - Memorial Hermann Center for Healthcare Quality and Safety.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 created approximately $20 billion in incentives for individuals and organizations to “meaningfully” use electronic health records beginning next year. Previous studies report that 4 percent of physicians in the outpatient setting and 1.5 percent of U.S. hospitals have a comprehensive electronic health record system.

“This framework can help make sure that electronic health records are used safely and effectively as doctors continue to adopt them,” said Hardeep Singh, M.D., M.P.H. co-author and assistant professor of medicine and health services research at the VA Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence and Baylor in Houston.

This framework of recommendations proposed by Sittig and Singh provides guidance for key stakeholders who are either currently involved or who will soon be involved with electronic health records.

“While using electronic health records, we not only have to consider issues related to technology, but also issues related to people who use them, how they interact with technology and how the electronic health record fits with the work flow of the clinic or organization that adopts it,” said Singh, who noted that if the Computerized Patient Record System developed by the Department of Veterans Affairs was included in the EHR-use study, the percentage of U.S. hospitals with a comprehensive electronic health record system would nearly double to 2.9 percent.

VA’s electronic health record system covers many aspects of patient care, including reminders for preventive health care, electronic entry of orders, display of laboratory test results, consultation requests, and pathology and imaging studies.

“The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act stipulates that clinicians and healthcare organizations can receive incentive payments for ‘meaningful use’ of EHRs. Depending on the definition and timeline for ‘meaningful use,’ this legislation could result in a rush to implement sub-optimal systems,” said Sittig, co-author of a new book that addresses EHR issues and is titled “Clinical Information Systems: Overcoming Adverse Consequences.”

For Americans to realize the full potential of electronic health records, which include reduced cost, less duplication and greater quality, Sittig and Singh believe all eight essentials, which are based on a systems engineering model for patient safety, should be followed.

1. Hardware and software - Before implementation starts, the clinician and healthcare organization must have the proper hardware and software. “Anything that slows or disrupts the clinician’s work flow could negatively affect patient safety,” the authors wrote. “While free electronic health record software available is available, such as Veterans Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA ) developed by VA, all of the other seven essentials in the framework must also be addressed for safe and effective use,” Sittig said.
2. Content - To make sure that information is shared effectively, the federal government has taken steps to standardize the terms used to describe clinical findings. “Adoption of a standard vocabulary is prerequisite to implementing advanced clinical decision support,” the authors wrote.
3. User interface - The information should be easy to access and to enter. Ideally, the interface should present all the important patient information in a way so that clinicians can rapidly recognize problems, and respond to them appropriately.
4. Personnel - For EHRs to work safely, healthcare organizations will need to hire trained and knowledgeable software designers, developers, trainers and implementation and maintenance staff. The American Medical Informatics Association has identified the knowledge and skills necessary for many of these jobs. The School of Health Information Sciences at Houston currently offers educational programs and degrees in these areas.
5. Work flow and communication - The EHR system needs to be thoroughly tested within the clinic or hospital prior to implementation. Any bugs in the system should be fixed ahead of time.
6. Organizational characteristics - There should be a system to report errors and identify obstacles to care. “Innovation, exploration and continual improvement are key organizational factors for safe EHR use. The VA is a model of many of these organizational features,” the authors state.
7. State and federal rules and regulations - Care must to be taken to make sure regulations protect patient safety and privacy.
8. Monitoring - Oversight, even after initial adoption and use, is crucial to the success of the switch from paper-based patient records to electronic records.

“These issues are essential to maximize patient care benefits and minimize unintended errors from technology,” Singh said.

The commentary is titled “Eight rights of safe electronic health record use.” The authors received support from the National Library of Medicine, the VA National Center of Patient Safety, the Houston VA Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence and the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality.

Above article published on

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090908193440.htm

By Mary Mosquera

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) plans to test its ability to accept selected clinical quality data directly from hospital electronic health record systems as early as July 2010.

CMS said it would seek volunteer hospitals to report stroke, blood clot and emergency department measures of care via EHR systems as part of the Reporting Hospital Quality Data for Annual Payment Update program, which provides higher Medicare payments to hospitals that report quality measures to the agency.

The agency detailed the plans in the Aug. 27 Federal Register in announcing changes to its rule for the Reporting Hospital Quality Data for Annual Payments Update. The program, a provision of 2003’s Medicare prescription drug legislation, required hospitals by 2010 to report on 42 quality measures to receive additional incentive payments.

Reporting to CMS is generally paper-based or through a mix of manual and automated systems.

Participating hospitals and their vendors will have to be able to transmit clinical EHR data that adhere to interoperability standards, such as cross document sharing, cross community access, clinical data architecture and Health Level 7 version 3, CMS said.

CMS has encouraged hospitals to adopt EHRs that can report quality data directly to a CMS data repository. Ideally, the use of EHR systems would improve the quality of care by providing physicians with pertinent clinical data as they were treating patients.

“The testing of EHR submission is an important and necessary step to establish the ability of EHRs to report clinical quality measures and the capacity of CMS to receive such data,” the agency said in the published interim rule.

The reporting of selected quality measures is also a key provision of the stimulus law. The Health IT Policy Committee, led by Dr. David Blumenthal, the national coordinator for health IT, has recommended that quality reporting be a part of the criteria providers must meet to demonstrate meaningful use of electronic health record systems, CMS said.

The stimulus law authorized Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments to providers who prove they are meaningful users of health IT starting in 2011.

Above article published on

http://www.govhealthit.com/newsitem.aspx?nid=72031

By Neil Versel

Lest the health IT industry be stuck with competing standards yet again, National Coordinator for Health IT Dr. David Blumenthal says he intends to harmonize standards for “meaningful use” of electronic health records within the framework of the planned Nationwide Health Information Network. Speaking at a users group for NHIN-Connect, the open-source software that supports NHIN development, Blumenthal said that federal standards for “meaningful use” of EHR software must be compatible with the national network. Meaningful use is the benchmark by which healthcare organizations will qualify for federal health IT subsidies beginning in 2011.

“NHIN can provide a path for meaningful use,” Blumenthal said, according to Federal Computer Week. The stimulus law requires meaningful use to include the ability to exchange patient-specific data. “Given the federal investment in health IT, and the definition of meaningful use, it is clear there is a vibrant future for the NHIN,” Blumenthal said. “Our hope is that it will support health information exchange and meaningful use at the federal, state and local levels.”

Above article published on

http://www.fierceemr.com/story/blumenthal-wants-meaningful-use-standards-work-nhin/2009-07-02

The Certification Commission for Health Information Technology is moving forward with plans to launch a new, less comprehensive electronic health records software certification program in light of the federal economic stimulus package.

In October, the commission plans to launch a more limited, modular inspection program for EHR software, focusing only on compliance with standards required for “meaningful use” of EHRs under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Rather than wait for the federal government’s final rule defining “meaningful use” of EHRs next spring, CCHIT is moving forward with its new certification efforts based on preliminary definition recommendations from federal HIT advisory committees, says Mark Leavitt, M.D., the commission’s chair. That’s because providers will have limited time to select and implement EHRs by 2011 to qualify for maximum Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments under ARRA.

CCHIT also will continue to update and enhance its existing, more comprehensive, EHR certification system for ambulatory, inpatient and emergency department settings, Leavitt said.

The Chicago-based commission will hold an online “town hall” meeting at noon September 3, when electronic health records vendors can learn about and discuss the two CCHIT certification efforts.

The commission’s action comes after the federal HIT Policy Committee’s certification/adoption workgroup recently recommended that multiple organizations offer “HHS Certification” testing of EHRs for the incentive program. The workgroup, in making its recommendation, said that CCHIT’s existing, comprehensive certification of EHRs should not be a requirement for incentive payments. Instead, software should be certified solely for achieving the minimum set of criteria to meet ARRA’s “meaningful use” standard, according to the workgroup.

But federal regulators have yet to make a final decision on a certification approach, much less designate whether CCHIT, or other organizations, will be the government’s recognized certification bodies.

Above article published on

http://www.healthdatamanagement.com/news/CCHIT-38877-1.html

The requirements for what health IT users need to do to meet the meaningful use dictates of the stimulus law are now clearer, with the focus apparently swinging to how the IT certification process will handle them.

Healthcare providers finally have some certainty about what they need to do to be meaningful users of health IT, said Dr. Bruce Taffel, chief medical officer of SharedHealth, an healthcare information exchange and application provider.

Dr. David Blumenthal, the national health IT coordinator, and the HIT Policy Committee, a public/private organization, approved July 16 a list of 28 health IT functions and corresponding quality and efficiency improvement measures for 2011 that become progressively more rigorous in 2013 and 2015.

The schedule is aggressive and the criteria will be difficult for some to achieve.

“The recommendations provide more clarity at this stage, although there’s still a lot more work to be done,” Taffel said today.

The goals for meaningful use are for providers to electronically capture data, report quality measures and use the data to track patients’ medical conditions. Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, providers will be eligible for increased Medicare and Medicaid payments beginning in 2011 if they demonstrate meaningful use of their certified health IT. The payments end after 2015 when health IT should be broadly adopted.

“The committee shaped their recommendations on meaningful use and the progression to achieve that on the basis of what we can do today, what the current condition is and with a fairly reasonable explanation of how you begin phasing in much of this,” Taffel said.

The policy committee also made its first recommendations on the certification process of electronic health records. Currently, the Certification Commission for Health IT (CCHIT) is the sole certifying and testing organization. The HIT Policy Committee wants more competition.

Multiple groups will be needed to perform certifications because so many more providers will seek to have the service conform to the stimulus, said Paul Egerman, retired businessman and chair of the committee’s certification and adoption work group.

The certification process should also accommodate a scaled-down version of certification process for systems or applications that still allows providers to prove they are meaningful users with components of comprehensive electronic health records, EHRs from multiple sources or self-developed applications, he said.

“If comprehensive certification is important, say for vendor marketing, it’s a positive thing that should continue to exist,” Egerman said.

The committee agreed to focus certification on a minimal set of requirements for meaningful use, and not on features and functions. The national coordinator’s office would review CCHIT certification criteria for gaps in assuring meaningful use.

“We could have the meaningful use gap certification process decided by Labor Day,” Blumenthal said.

Those products that are currently CCHIT-certified will be certified for meaningful use under the Health and Human Services Department definition for 2011, “subject to completing a special meaningful use gap certification,” according to the work group’s transition plan.

The work group also urged that the certification process be used to improve progress on security, privacy and interoperability and provide a tighter link with standards.

Above article published on

http://www.govhealthit.com/newsitem.aspx?tid=10&nid=71842

FISMA is becoming a roadblock for electronic health record implementation, Government Health IT magazine reported this week.

The Federal Information and Security Management Act (FISMA), passed by Congress in 2002 to better protect the federal government against cyber attacks, mandates information security standards for all federal agencies. This includes the flow of data between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) and their contractors—over 200 hundred of them, processing billions of Medicare claims. The new worry from CMS, according to Government Health IT, is that healthcare providers sharing EHR files will be required to meet FISMA standards, which include an annual security test and FISMA certification.

A CMS spokesperson is quoted as saying that this would be more than “burdensome” for both CMS and health care providers and organizations.

The conundrum is that information will be moving between the HIPPA world (the private sector) and the FISMA world (the government)—that latter of which is much more secure, from a protocol/standards perspective. Federal agencies are held to a higher standard than the private sector with respect to information security.

For a long time, consumer groups have argued that HIPPA is a weak standard for patient information security. Yet, many worry that if FISMA is applied to the private sector, there will be a compliance crisis that will be costly to remedy. But why shouldn’t the transfer of health information be held to the highest security standards? Advocates of a middle ground argue “yes,” but not quite as stringent as FISMA. They standards should be more of a more of a “HIPPA-plus” or “FISMA-lite,” in the words of Vish Sankaran, a program director for the Federal Health Architecture project to connect health information entities.

In other words, get health care providers better engaged in securing healthcare information but do not stunt the growth of the EHR movement by placing the bar too high.

In the end, the Office of Management and Budget will dictate the debate through their determination of what falls under the FISMA umbrella. In August of 2008, OMB issued some guidance, stating that FISMA applies to groups that “possess or use Federal information—or which operate, use or have access to Federal information systems (whether automated or manual)—on behalf of a Federal agency.” OK, that could include a ton of organizations.

Confusing? You bet. This is government language after, all. Much like statistics, just mold it to your current need.

There is still debate over whether, for example, health information exchanges (HIEs) that “exchange” information but do not “access” federal information systems need to be FISMA compliant. In any event, there is a strong and important need to address information security in the field of healthcare. Will FISMA be the best vehicle for achieving information security with respect to patient information? That remains unresolved, but hopefully, the work to find a middle ground, coaxing the private sector into requiring more robust security standards, will be the outcome.

Above article published on

http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2009/06/30/fisma-a-roadblock-for-ehrs.aspx

Maryland further strengthened the goals of the stimulus package or the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) this past week by passing legislation that required insurers to provide “monetary” incentives for physicians to adopt electronic health records (EHR).

The bill, signed by Governor Martin O’Malley, is one of the first of its kind to give sharper teeth to the EHR movement. Insurers may choose from a variety of fiscal incentives including increased reimbursement and lump-sum payments, according to Health IT News. The effort is viewed as a double incentive to providers to join the digital transition that promises to increase health care system efficiency while reducing medical errors for patients. Maryland is not alone in its effort to promote the change from paper to portal; other states are reviewing similar measures that would jumpstart implementation.

Included in the Maryland bill is a requirement for the state to bring a piloted health information exchange (HIE) live by October 1. The goal of the HIE, often comprised of business and community representatives, is to provide support to health care system stakeholders with the goal of increasing efficiency and quality.

Wait, have we heard of an HIE before? Yes. For clarification purposes, regional health information organizations (RHIO) and HIEs are terms used interchangeably; the HIE is simply a new name for a RHIO—it has yet to be determined if it is also a newer and better RHIO. Lingo aside, HIE investment is up.

Other states are looking to HIEs/RHIOs to play a prominent role in EHR adoption. New York, Texas, and Florida are all investing in these information exchanges.

In New York, the Western New York Clinical Information Exchange, known as HealthElink, signed on 6 EHR software vendors to provide community pricing to its clients.

In Texas, the legislature passed two pilot health information exchange programs that promote data transfer between local agencies.

Florida, having received a $9+ million grant from the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), is exploring how to expand broadband access across nine rural hospitals to increase the speed and efficiency of health data transfer.

Other states are vying to develop strategies for technology adoption that support EHR implementation as stimulus dollars dangle overhead. Now that EHRs are heavily banked by both federal and state government, HIEs and RHIOs may take a greater role in aiding communities in EHR adoption. These exchanges hope to serve as important providers of data warehousing as well as offering leadership for the development of criteria for data sharing and data quality. States view HIEs/RHIOs as vehicles for transporting dollars toward the development of technology infrastructure and they are moving as quickly as possible to get their take.

Above article published on

http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2009/06/01/states-take-bigger-role-in-promoting-ehr-adoption.aspx

Technically Speaking. By Pamela Lewis Dolan, AMNews staff.

If you talk to 10 physician practices after a major technology implementation, you’ll likely get 10 different stories about the lessons they learned.

So what is the biggest mistake? Experts say it’s not listening to those doctors and learning from their experiences.

Consultants say no matter whether you are a hospital or small physician practice, or whether you are implementing an electronic medical record or an e-prescribing system, there are patterns in the mistakes made during the shopping for and implementing of technology.

“In medicine, there will be times when people try things and they will turn out to not be the best things to do. You don’t want to be in a situation of making a mistake when “all you had to do is check with somebody to find the appropriate way to do things,” said James Jose, MD, a pediatric critical care doctor who is chief information officer of Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta.

Richard C. Howe, PhD, vice president of business development at Healthcare Informatics Associates, said he, too, has seen several implementation projects fail after trying to go it alone without asking for advice from experts or peers. HIA, based in Bainbridge Island, Wash., provides health IT consulting and implementation services.

Experts such as consultants, trade groups and user groups, have a wider pool of experiences to draw from, Howe said. And peers are important because they can provide an overview of what problems they ran into and how they solved them.

Finding the right practice to talk to, and figuring out the best questions to ask, may take some homework and planning. But it’s worth the time and effort.

Karen Colorafi, RN, an independent consultant from Phoenix, said most practices start with a long list of possible vendors. Once that list is narrowed down to two or three, “I would definitely recommend not just picking up the phone but, if you can, do a site visit” to a practice using the system.

Every vendor has a list of references for potential clients to talk to. While references can be helpful, they shouldn’t be your only source of information, Dr. Jose said. National conferences are a great place for networking and meeting people, he said. Other references often can be found through national organizations such as the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society or the American Medical Informatics Assn.

But the best source, according to Dr. Jose, are the “benchmark organizations” that you look up to. Find the practice that is where you want to be five to 10 years from now. Talk to the people there and find out how they got there and what was learned along the way. Dr. Jose said most practices are willing to share their experiences.

What to ask EMR veterans

Experts say there are a handful of key questions that should always be asked of references, whether you found them on your own, or through your potential vendors:

• If you had it to do over again, what would you do differently?
• Would you recommend the same vendor?
• Did you budget correctly?
• What are the ongoing maintenance costs?
• How long did the system take to implement and what were the problems you encountered?
• How did you handle converting data from paper to electronic? How was data abstracted?

Just being aware of the most common problems can help guide you through the process, experts say. HIA’s Howe said even if a practice is satisfied with its vendor overall, chances are things did not go perfectly and something was learned along the way.

Sidestepping pitfalls

The following are among the most common mistakes that have clearly been defined, and can be avoided.

• Underestimating workflow changes. Talking to practices of similar size and scope will help give you realistic expectations. Dan Rodgers, president and CEO of MedCo Data, a Tampa, Fla.-based consulting practice said practices also should evaluate workflow before implementation and develop the ideal workflow for postimplementation.
• Not allowing enough time for training. Howe said he has heard several vendors use the sales pitch that their systems require no training. Talking to someone who uses the system will verify that’s likely not the case. There are no plug-and-play systems, experts say.
• Treating the project solely as an IT project as opposed to a business decision. “If you are a pediatrician, you are in the business of treating kids; if you are an orthopedic [specialist], you’re in the business of running an orthopedic group,” said Howe. Whatever system you select should support that business.
• Failing to consider future needs in negotiations. Rodgers said just implementing the core will likely mean the practice will have to go back to that vendor for more. Rodgers said practices should negotiate those prices at the time of the initial implementation and have the vendor sign off on a statement of intent to purchase. Otherwise, you are stuck with a vendor who, after the fact, can set any price, he said.
• Not defining a clear path for return on investment. Rodgers said many practices jump in, accepting the vendors promise of profit, but don’t sit down and develop a plan to get them there.
• Not having a legal expert review the contract. “When you are getting ready to sign a $50,000 contract, it’s worth a couple hundred bucks to have someone review that contract for you,” Colorafi said.
• Going cheap on the infrastructure. Rodgers said he has heard from several practices that say their systems aren’t performing the way they were promised. In reality, he said, they were running the systems on older, less-expensive computers and servers that weren’t allowing the system to run at optimal levels.
• Delegating the implementation to nonphysicians. Colorafi said she has seen many implementations fail because the job of selecting a system was delegated to a practice manager instead of a physician who will be using it. Others can be used to gather background information, she said, but taking the systems for a test run should fall to the physician.

Above article published on

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2009/06/22/bica0622.htm

The federal government is establishing a new system for updating medical records of servicemen and women during and after their military careers, President Obama announced Thursday.

The joint virtual lifetime electronic record will, among other things, help ensure a streamlined transition of health care records between the Pentagon and the Veterans Administration.

It will provide “a framework to ensure that all health care providers have all the information they need to deliver high-quality health care while reducing medical errors,” the White House said in a background statement.

“When a member of the armed forces separates from the military, he or she will no longer have to walk paperwork from a [Defense Department] duty station to a local VA health center. Their electronic records will transition along with them and remain with them forever,” Obama said in remarks delivered near the White House.

The system will “cut through red tape” and allow new veterans to start receiving their benefits more quickly, he promised.

During the announcement, Obama was joined by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki.

“We welcome this news. … This is a huge day for veterans and troops,” Paul Rieckhoff, head of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, told CNN.

“This is a good way for [Obama] to come back from Iraq and make a powerful statement.”

The White House recently proposed a significant budget increase for the Veterans Administration, including an 11 percent hike in fiscal year 2010.

In March, however, the administration abandoned a controversial plan to charge private insurers for treatment of veterans’ service-connected ailments.

Veterans’ representatives and members of Congress angrily opposed the proposal, which White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said was never finalized.

Above article published online on www.cnn.com

20th Annual HIMSS Leadership Survey Findings Show Commitment to Healthcare IT, Cite EMR, CPOE, Security, Financial Concerns as Top Issues

CHICAGO — Implementing clinical systems – including an electronic medical record (EMR) and computerized provider order entry systems (CPOE) – was cited as the top priority for healthcare information technology (IT) professionals who responded to the 20th Annual Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS) Leadership Survey.

Of the 304 respondents, 31 percent said the primary focus would be ensuring their organization has a full EMR. Another 17 percent said the primary focus would be the installation of a CPOE. Complete results of the Leadership Survey will be presented today at the 2009 Annual HIMSS Conference & Exhibition, one of the largest conferences in the IT industry.

Survey respondents’ answers also suggested the weakened economy has slowed the breakneck pace of growth but also that they and their organizations remain committed to healthcare IT. More than half of respondents (55 percent) said their IT budgets would increase, compared to 78 percent last year, and 42 percent said their staffing levels would increase, compared to 68 percent last year.

Many respondents completed the research prior to the Feb. 17 signing of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), which aims to prompt the widespread adoption of healthcare IT and enable electronic exchange of health information through financial incentives. To assess the impact that the ARRA will have on IT spending, HIMSS is gathering additional information from survey respondents.

“The economy is affecting all sectors, healthcare IT included, but the good news is healthcare IT still continues to grow,” said Charles E. Christian, HIMSS board chair. “With the passage of the ARRA, the resulting billions of dollars intended to stimulate healthcare IT should certainly impact how respondents view their budget options.”

As in past years, security issues remain a top concern and 84 percent of respondents said their organization actively assesses security risks. One in four (25 percent) said they’d had a security breach in the past year. To address the risks, nearly half (49 percent) said they plan to purchase single sign-on technology in the next year. Currently, 31 percent said they have single sign-on technology. Other security technologies a third or more respondents said they plan to purchase include e-mail encryption; biometric technologies, intrusion prevention/detection service and data encryption. Currently, 62 percent use e-mail encryption, 18 percent use biometric technologies, 75 percent use intrusion prevention/detection service and 56 percent use data encryption.

Other findings of the 20th Leadership Survey include:

• Respondents were most likely to indicate that IT can have an impact by reducing medical errors (38 percent) and improving quality outcomes (24 percent).
• While 29 percent said sustaining financial viability was the key business objective at their organization, 24 percent identified patient safety and quality of care as the single key business objective.
• More than half (54 percent) said financial considerations was the business issue that would most impact on healthcare.
• Lack of adequate financial resources was identified by 28 percent of respondents as the top barrier to successful implementation of IT. Although this has been named as the top barrier for nine years straight, the percentage continues to climb – last year it was cited by 26 percent of respondents and the year before by 20 percent.
• An overwhelming majority (84 percent) said there is a strong level of integration between IT strategies and overall organizational strategy: 37 percent said their IT strategic plan is a component of the organization’s strategic plan and 47 percent said the plans were separate, but integrated.

Twenty years of HIMSS Leadership Surveys have tracked the shifts in healthcare IT implementation and mindset. Steady progress has been documented. For instance, the 1995 survey asked respondents about their plans for implementing an EMR – what was then called a computer-based patient record system – and just 26 percent of respondents said they had invested in software and equipment (although not necessarily implemented it), while 74 percent of respondents essentially hadn’t even begun. Perhaps not fully understanding the complexities of the issue, 87 percent of survey respondents thought physicians would be able to share computerized patient information in a nationwide system by 2005. This year 41 percent said they have a fully operational EMR in at least one facility in their organization, up from 32 percent two years ago. Seventeen percent said they have a fully operational EMR throughout their entire organization. More than a third (37 percent) said they’d begun to install EMR in at least one facility.

Above article published on www.himss.org.