CCHIT Town Call: An Invitation to Join Us
The Certification Commission plans to open applications March 23 – April 20 for work group volunteers to support its expanded 2009-2010 certification program development. That expansion will add six new certification programs and update the Commission’s existing programs. Join the Commission’s chair, Dr. Mark Leavitt, for a CCHIT Town Call teleconference to discuss the Commission’s plans for the 2010 development year
Date: March 17, 2009
Time: 4:00 pm ET / 1:00 pm PT
Participant Dial-In Number: (877) 313-5342
Conference ID Number: 88375181
[NOTE: These slides were revised on March 23, 2009, to incorporate recent changes to the work group structure.]
Questions?
Use the comment form below to pose your questions to CCHIT. We will attempt to answer as many questions as possible during the call. Questions that are not answered during the call will be answered by CCHIT staff and posted to EHR Decisions.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 50 comments… read them below or add one }
How can you be certain that the HHS guidelines for EHR adoption will rely on CCHIT for certification? What if the Federal Government has a totally different agenda. I understand that they have to deliver the federal mandates for EHR standards by Dec 31, 2009.
What if they decide that the current VA EHR or a variant thereof is their choice. Afterall this is funded by tax payer dollars and theoretically belongs to all of us. Why should an EHR in progress, like my company, spend incredibly large sums of money for CCHIT? I can not listen to you answer tomorrow, so please Email me above.
Thanks for your attention,
M Leftick MD
Dr. Leftick:
Please review the March 17 Town Call presentation and audio published on this site. It provides answers to your questions.
If you start accepting applications for the working groups on 3/23, these are presumably relatively standard forms. My interest is in the LTC related working group. Where can I find the template for the application?
If the belief is that CCHIT will be the standard for certification, will the cost to submit and test EMR/EHRs be lowered in an effort to allow smaller companies to participate in the certification process?
The initial cost of testing an EMR/EHR with a specialty, can be around $50k, and that is for a 2 year certification, unless of course the software has a version change, at which time the vendor would need to resubmit the application for testing. The cost for this resubmission is half of the original testing fee. The incentive to continually develop your product for the physicians’ ease of use, or productivity would be removed, and in fact discouraged due to the cost of version change testing fees.
These costs would of course force a small company out of business or require them to pass the cost along to their physician clients. Therefore the result would be that the physicians’ only choice for an EMR /EHR would be one that cost significantly more.
Thank you,
Bea
What is CCHIT’s plan to support certification of niche EMRs for subspecialties where the market is not big enough to support the development of full ambulatory functionality, and indeed, physician customers place much lower priority on such functionality vs support for the specialty functions? Might CCHIT consider certification of subspecialties with Foundation criteria plus specialty functionality.
Does this imply the need to revamp Foundation criteria to be minimum criteria needed by all EMRs? What is the current status of Foundation?
I understand that the CCHIT has a lot a gound to cover in a very short time; but if attention is not paid to the details of implementation, there could be problems and frustration down the road. Even the workgroups are looking at fairly big pictures.
Case in point, my three children recently visited a medical group in our community here in South Pasadena, CA. Two of them were about to be given immunization shots they already had; fortunately my memory served me well and prevented the mistake. The physician told me that they have coverted all the records to the new EHR system in the last two years.
Certified software products alone does not garantee proper implementation of EHR systems. One solution is to empower the patients to track their own health records and verify those at the doctor’s office.
Therefore, certified software products should provide the necessary features for patients to download the info and check their own records.
This feature would also allow patients to monitor their own health over time–tracking their level of LDL or HDL, etc.
Outside of the VA’s EHR system, 30-40 competing vendors of EHR systems are selling software incompatible with their competitors.
For example, to address a prior submitter’s concern, PatientGate(tm) allows someone to manage their family’s health information in one spot, providing a single point of access to all of your family’s healthcare information.
To protect investment by physicians, I look forward to hearing how CCHIT can help provide the interoperabilty needed to make HIT solutions such as this one more compatible with each other.
How does one apply to to become part of the Security and Privacy workgroup? Can multiple members from the same organization be part of this group?
How does submitting for reimbursement for incentives change the way we report in our cost report?
While the CCHIT is already planning to expand on its HIT certification, judging from many of the comments and questions from the folks out there, there are a lot of people are still on first base.
I believe that an implementation workgroup would be helpful to the physicians and IT providers.
This workgroup would provide answers and guidelines developed by the other workgroups from privacy and security issues to interoperability and decision support system.
It may even provide guidelines as to the naming convention and data field requirements for reporting communicable to the local county and state public health agencies or even for patients to download the data correctly.
How do you anticipate the 2009 certification cycle will be be affected by the fact that the initial ARRA certification requirements need not be issued until the end of this year. Will it start on time and do you anticipate the need for mid-cycle adjustments?
The language of ARRA and HITECH is all around interoperability as the primary driver of certification; while there is mention of other areas such as clinical decision support the overriding emphasis is on interoperability. Looking at the current CCHIT certification criteria, while interoperability is a piece of the certification pie, it is actually a relatively small piece. By a quick count just based on source workgroup, there are 500 criteria for inpatient certification of which just 42 are from the interoperablity workgroup. I know that’s a simplistic analysis and that there are other interoperability criteria as well, but the question remains: if certification is designed to encourage interoperability and CCHIT as currently structured is approximately 10% interoperability and 90% “everything else” – how reasonable is to expect that CCHIT will be adopted without major changes in definition of scope? Perhaps CCHIT should be working towards an interoperability-specific certification track as a way of aligning itself with the language and intent of ARRA?
It is my understanding that there are no plans for a certification protocol that would cover entities focused on reporting/monitoring comparative effectiveness, ie. HIT systems that collect and support cardiac/ortho implant registries
Is it possible to include this topic in the near future?
If so what steps must be taken to initiate this process?
Do you anticipate from moving from a Pass/Fail EHR certification process to a process of passing basic minimal EHR requirements and then achieving advanced certification that meets the basic level of certification along with a more advance requirements? ie…+Advanced Security, +Interoperability, +UserInterface, +Specialities?
I read in recent article from AMA Assn news that the national health IT coordinator will be authorized to make available a qualifying EHR system to physicians for a nominal fee. Can you expand on the availability of this EHR system and CCHIT involvement?
Thank you
Jack Simpson
Questions posted to Slideshare:
1. When a workgroup is formed to begin work on criteria for a new healthcare setting, what type of guidance/instructions are given to that workgroup? (from Anonymous)
2. (For Kari Taylor Atkins) Since it seems the certification program is more of an conformance program and maybe not a full Interop Certification program, how many (%) Interop problems are making into the field? If so are they slowing addoption? (from Rik Drummond, Drummond Group Inc )
3. for Long Term care certification – is that Long Term care like nursing home, and assisted living – or long term home health like Home Life support patients – or all? (from Anonymous)
4. What type of time commitment (hours) has generally been required? (from Eric Kardon)
5. Why is it a prerequisite to serve on a group focused on developing standards for Advanced Quality that you first serve on another workgroup? (from Anonymous)
Does the conflict of interest requirement require disclosure of stock held in companies offering EHR systems (e.g., GE, Siemens, etc.)?
Are we to understand that the 2009 Ambulatory Cert requirements will be out later in the year in 2009. We had expected them in May, but will they be delayed this year, due to ARRA?
Do you anticipate adding additional security criteria to the Inpatient 2009 Certification Criteria? The ARRA discusses many legal items that are not covered in CCHIT Criteria, such as Accounting of Disclosures. Do you expect these items to be added to the criteria for certification?
Can you summarize the role of Vendor Stakeholder?
Many of the IO criteria directly reference HITSP specs. There are times these specs are too restrictive as the use cases they were scoped to are not always in line with EHR – EHR interop. Do you see the existing HITSP specs being as relevant with the CCHIT 2010?
What about healthcare IT in other care areas, like Ambulatory Surgery Centers? Many of them have software, but CCHIT does not Certify in this area.
What does it cost for a vendor to get their EHR product certified through CCHIT? What accounts for this cost? Will the cost change in the future?
I am looking for a out-of-the-box Microsoft SharePoint-based EMR solution.
Could you give me some pointers to the vendors who already have implemented either WSS 3.0 or MOSS 2007 EMRs.
Thanks,
Mark.
Will quality reporting and disclosure reporting (under the privacy section) require the creation of new functionality and standards within certified EHRs?
Have you considered a sliding scale for companies grossing less than $1M per year for the certification fee.
The current CCHIT requirements include functionality that may not be needed by small practices. Assuming the HHS standards will represent a basic minimum standard, will CCHIT develop certification for just the basic standards?
Why are the workgroup meetings not open to the public?
Ms. Sauls:
CCHIT is a private, 501c3 nonprofit organization, not a public agency. Regular work group meetings are held via teleconference as frequently as weekly. All work group meeting minutes are available to the public at http://www.cchit.org.
Ms. Sauls:
CCHIT will remain flexible and responsive to the requirements of ARRA and any resulting Federal rulemaking or adminsitrative decisions.
Mr. Spiro:
Early surveys of both large and small vendors ruled out a sliding scale fee for certification due to the required financial reporting that would be necessary to administer such a fee structure. As it has already done with non-profit health information exchanges, the Commission may establish special grants to reduce certification fees for non-profit or non-commercial developers of EHRs. That will be dependent upon the availability of funds to support such grants.
Mr. Piechowski:
CCHIT will adapt its certification process to meet the requirements of ARRA and any resulting Federal rulemaking or administrative decisions.
Mark:
CCHIT cannot make product recommendations.
Ms. Katzman:
Information about certification fees is available in the program certification handbooks at http://www.cchit.org/certify . The Commission is a private, 501c3 nonprofit with a charge to become self-sustaining. Collected fees cover the costs of certification program development, product inspection – including application review and administration, paid jury observation, techincal testing tool development, testing technology infrastructure and product listing – and stakeholder outreach. Certification fees are adapted to the health IT marketplace and the resource capacity of the Commission.
Mr. Benson:
From time to time, the Commission conducts an open call for expansion. Such a call was recently completed and new programs were approved at the Feb 17, 2009 Commission meeting. To assess the potental for a new program’s success, the Commission considers factors such as the public benefit of expanding certification, stakeholder readiness for certification and the cost to develop certification. Certification represents basic requirements that the Commission believes are appropriate for common care settings where most Americans get their care. As its work has matured, the Commission has added new programs for special populations, special settings and medical specialties such as child health, cardiovascular care and emergency departments. CCHIT acknowledges that certification may not yet be available for every care setting. Expansion will continue based on new Federal requirements, Commisson priority setting and the Commission’s capacity.
Mr. Barker:
As required by ARRA, CCHIT will base new criteria on standards approved by the Office of the National Coordinator and its Health Information Technology Standards Committee.
Mr. Soltis:
From its inception, CCHIT has included a broad range of health IT stakeholders – physicians and providers, consumer representative groups, payers, health IT vendors, quality improvement organizations, government agencies and more – in its development of consensus-based certification programs. On the board of Commissioners, in volunteer work groups and through public comment, vendors have contributed to that consensus with practical advice about product development. And, for the past 3 years, they have continued to bring new products for testing and certification as that consensus-based process raised the bar of certification higher.
Jessica:
The 09 Inpatient EHR criteria are scheduled for a final public comment period from March 30 to April 28. They will not be finalized until mid-May.
CCHIT will adapt its certification process to meet the requirements of ARRA and any resulting Federal rulemaking or administrative decisions.
Mr. Quackenbush:
The 09 Ambulatory EHR criteria and test scripts will be published in May 2009 and application for 09 Ambulatory EHR certification will open on July 1, 2009.
CCHIT will adapt its future certification process to meet the requirements of ARRA and any resulting Federal rulemaking or administrative decisions.
Mr. Hurdock:
The conflict of interest questions contained in the CCHIT volunteer application will require disclosure of any material equity holdings in health IT companies that could apply for certification.
Mr. Simpson:
The language in ARRA reads:
‘‘SEC. 3007. FEDERAL HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The National Coordinator shall support the development, routine updating, and provision of qualified EHR technology (as defined in section 3000) consistent with subsections (b) and (c) unless the Secretary determines that the needs and demands of providers are being substantially and adequately met through the marketplace.” and
‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION TO CHARGE A NOMINAL FEE.—The National Coordinator may impose a nominal fee for the adoption by a health care provider of the health information technology system developed or approved under subsection (a) and (b). Such fee shall take into account the financial circumstances of smaller providers, low income providers, and providers located in rural or other medically underserved areas.”
We can’t predict a Secretary’s future ruling on EHR marketplace availability or the amount or conditions of a nominal fee. It seems clear throughout this legislation that any qualified EHR would still need to meet the conditions of certification and meaningful use if a physician wished to qualify for funding under this new Federal program.
Denis:
CCHIT continues to support the concept that a product should pass 100% of the criteria for a defined certification program to be considered in conformance with the requirements of the program. As noted in our Town Call, our certification programs will be flexible and adaptable to the new rulings and administrative decisions of the HHS Secretary and Federal agencies, including ONC and CMS. Those decisions could conceivably result in a more modular approach to certification.
Mr. Wells:
Current Ambulatory EHR criteria already require general reporting capabilities without reference to specific domains such as cardiology or orthopedics. Advanced Quality is already a certification program chosen for further development in 2009-2010.
Mr. Blanks:
CCHIT’s future certification programs will be adapted to the requirements of ARRA, including rulemaking and administrative decisions made by the Secretary and Federal agencies such as ONC and CMS. Advanced Interoperability is already a certification program chosen for further development in 2009-2010.
Mr. Segal:
CCHIT’s 2009-2010 certification cycle will begin as planned in July. Adjustments are always made throughout the development year based on public comment cycles and Commission guidance. There will be opportunity between the beginning of the cycle and it’s scheduled completion in May/June 2010 to accommodate any certification program changes required as a result of ARRA.
Mr. Louie:
As noted in the Town Call: expectations for certification no longer end with product testing. Responsibility extends to usability, meaningful use, quality measurement, data exchange –and ultimately health IT‟s role in health reform. Implemention may fall into the Commission’s considerations in the coming development year.
Mr. Ruiz:
This is not a question we can answer since we are not a Federal agency and we do not administer reimbursement. This is probably best directed toward CMS.
Mr. Nanji:
Application instructions will be available at http://www.cchit.org beginning on March 23. To preserve a fair balance of stakeholders, multiple members of a single organization would not be appointed to a single group.
Dr. Harrison:
Foundation criteria have been harmonized across the current certification domains – ambulatory, inpatient, etc. Our certification programs already include a basic ambulatory EHR certification with add-on programs for special areas such as child health and cardiovascular medicine, so this process has already begun. In the next few development cycles, we have identifed six additional add-on categories. As noted in our Town Call, our certification programs will be flexible and adaptable to the new rulings and administrative decisions of the HHS Secretary and Federal agencies, including ONC and CMS. Those decisions could conceivably result in a more modular approach to certification.
Mr. Logan:
The instructions and forms for application will be available beginning on March 23 at http://www.cchit.org
Leave a Comment