Getting ready for Stage Two ?
It is October. Time to get flu shots, hustle the kids to school for a new school year, and, yes concentrate on, mu! Qualifying for the stage two of meaningful use guidelines, is going to be tough for physicians. It is certainly no stroll in the park but it isn’t mission impossible either. The final regulations for meaningful use stage two emphasize on interoperability of data and more standardized data formats.
With 2014 drawing near it is time for the smart doc to plan ahead and gear up for the incentive !
Start with the lab…
Do you still run down the corridor to fetch x-rays ? A lab interface that can integrate with your existing emr or ehr can be helpful in qualifying for meaningful use. Lab data contains pertinent patient information and proper filing and documenting of patient records, is critical to attest for the mu incentive.
Several pac systems can integrate with ehrs and emrs. Pick one now and cast aside one major worry.
Are you Encrypting your Data ?
It is important that all personally identifiable health information is encrypted, when “not in use”. Ensure your vendors, staff and anybody who has access to your medical records, encrypts them.
Patient communication is going to be all important…
If you are a busy doctor who rushes through patient appointments, you’ll have to change the way you work. As expected meaningful use stage 2 raises the bar for patient engagement and communication. It is important that your patients are able to access their records and lab results. Asking your ehr vendor to set up a separate, password protected individual access, to patients can help in bettering patient communication.
A Mixed Bag !
The revised guidelines for stage 2 offer a mixed baggage for medical practitioners. It’s gone easy on several regulations that were proposed initially, such as reducing the number of patients, who have to be offered online access to medical information, from 10% to 5 %. But on the other hand has raised the bar for, ensuring patient communication and interoperability.
But it is widely believed to be, in the long run, not just a game changer but harbinger for a better and more secure healthcare environment.
All in the set goal , looking to the future beginning today in the bettering of overall patient care, awareness. The only age range of patients that I dont see in this or at a minimal access’ knoweledge is the medicare aged patient. In my experience of working direct with patients in reception, billing, interpretation, form completion, it is the patient who lacks knoweledge or interest in this type of patient/doctor system. There are those that are partakers, aware of there conditions, reasons, reasons for visits, consults, basic health , treamtments, those under the care of treatment with a companion caring for them. I can remember years ago when I worked then in a medical clinic, general practice, dermatology, etc. Then the staff of doctors were already discussing the ways to train patient awareness, dr to patient contact, familiarity with patients in many areas. This is still today being worked out. Phone calls from patients angry at miscoding dxs, injections covered, non covered with nurse dr awareness of what can and cannot be done an issue.
Insurance problems coverage issues etc. A SYMPATHETIC EAR always helps. Explaining to an aged patient what the conditions is, what and when to take meds as on a schedule when they already went thru the dr patient visit. “honey can you tell me why, I already, I just dont understand any fo this at all. … I can go on and on in conversations with aged …patients of all age ranges understading and no understaing. in or outa hospital…I suppose patient partaking in these type of systems can be a psotivie issue in many areas even in med records. I have a stak of er reports from the alst two three months here…Which is the report that I need, I cannot see dont udnerstand at all. 10172012 vro
I’ m 77, still practicing FT as a ped.ophthalmologist. I have loeokd at a number of systems and there is not one that suits my purposes. They are way too complicated and inappropriate, being based on primary care practice, or because they are interacting with every piece of equipment known to man. They slow me down and hinder my interaction with the patients, who see more of my neck than my face, which certainly is not good for pediatric patients. On top of this, I have seen no convincing evidence that the EHR is any more accurate than my written one. And the templates, often written in atrocious English, force you into a specific frame work, with little room for deviations from the norm. At this point I have a lot more confidence in my stubby pencil, than in these expensive electronic systems. That the government is cramming this stuff down our throats, adds insult to injury.