This help clarify the situation.
September 17, 2009
HIT do-overs
I read a very interesting and well-written post on the Healthcare Blog by MARGALIT GUR-ARIE.
It reminds me of the conversation in the movie City Slickers when Billy Crystal tells his friend his life is a do-over. From where I sit, I think a do-over is exactly what’s needed on two fronts. On the provider side, EHR decisions need to be based on what business problems are being addressed and on an ROI, not on what DC may or may not do. On the interoperability or transport side of the record I do not believe much of what is being worked on today will exist in 3-5 years (which further compounds the difficulty of what the providers are doing.) I think Meaningful Use and Certification will cease to exist, and that the structure of hundreds of Rhios and HIEs will cease to exist because they will have failed to work.
Don’t let DC drive your selection process
The decision to do EMR/EHR should be made independently of Washington. There either is or isn’t a valid business reason for going forward. ARRA funds and penalties are not valid business reasons unless perhaps you operate a very small practice.
I believe there are valid reasons. I also believe that without knowing which of those reasons suite your organization there is a strong possibility of selecting the wrong system.
EHR Leadership–Who’s in charge?
Nicely written. I look at the need from the perspective of the path not traveled. For most, the task of selecting the correct EHR and managing the effort would be like me buying a spaceship–never been there, never done that.
Providers are well-staffed on the clinical side, and on the IT side. The problem is that none of them has the high cost, high risk, high visibility PMO (project management officer) skills that are required to buy something that can cost more than a new hospital wing.
So what do they do? They pull someone out of IT or clinical and hand her the keys. Most large IT projects will fail. MOre EHR projects will fail.
Here’s a nicely written piece by Elyse of AntiClue. http://www.anticlue.net/archives/000970.htm
I look at the need from the perspective of the path not traveled. For most, the task of selecting the correct EHR and managing the effort would be like me buying a spaceship–never been there, never done that.
Providers are well-staffed on the clinical side, and on the IT side. The problem is that none of them has the high cost, high risk, high visibility PMO (project management officer) skills that are required to buy something that can cost more than a new hospital wing.
So what do they do? They pull someone out of IT or clinical and hand her the keys. Most large IT projects will fail. MOre EHR projects will fail.
That’s my opinion, but nobody has talked me out of it.
2011 lost it’s relevancy
It’s time to quit tiptoeing around 2011 and HIT and Meaningful Use and Certification, acting like they are relevant. Since the unspoken general consensus is that their relevancy has passed shouldn’t we be using our efforts to formulate a plan to make them relevant?
