Bela T. Matyas, MD, MPH Health Officer, Solano County



Similar documents
MEANINGFUL USE STAGE FOR ELIGIBLE PROVIDERS USING CERTIFIED EMR TECHNOLOGY

Presented by. Terri Gonzalez Director of Practice Improvement North Carolina Medical Society

STAGE 2 MEANINGFUL USE CORE AND MENU MEASURES FOR ELIGIBLE PROFESSIONALS

ARRA HITECH Meaningful Use Objectives & Implications to Public Health Lab

Meaningful Use. Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs

Meaningful Use Updates Stage 2 and 3. Julia Moore, Business Analyst SMC Partners, LLC July 8, 2015

Overview of Vital Records and Public Health Informatics in CDPH

Stage 1 vs. Stage 2 Comparison Table for Eligible Professionals Last Updated: August, 2012

Stage 1 vs. Stage 2 Comparison for Eligible Professionals

Planning for Health Information Technology and Exchange in Public Health

STAGES 1 AND 2 REQUIREMENTS FOR MEETING MEANINGFUL USE OF EHRs 1

MEETING MEANINGFUL USE IN MICROMD -STAGE TWO- Presented by: Anna Mrvelj EMR Training Specialist

Meaningful Use - The Basics

Meaningful Use Stage 1:

Meaningful Use Objectives

Achieving Meaningful Use with Centricity EMR

Michigan Medicaid EHR Incentive Program Update Jason Werner - MDCH

MEANINGFUL USE STAGE 2 REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE PROVIDERS USING CERTIFIED EMR TECHNOLOGY

STAGE 2 of the EHR Incentive Programs

Stage 1 vs. Stage 2 Comparison Table for Eligible Hospitals and CAHs Last Updated: August, 2012

Understanding Meaningful Use. Review of Part 1 and Part 2

Contact Information: West Texas Health Information Technology Regional Extension Center th Street MS 6232 Lubbock, Texas

Meaningful Use in 2015 and Beyond Changes for Stage 2

Stage 2 Final Rule Overview: Updates to Stage 1 and New Stage 2 Requirements

LIS Vendor Landscape and Options for Meeting ELR Meaningful Use

0 What is Meaningful Use and where are we? 0 What is the Physician Quality Reporting System and where stage are we on?

VIII. Dentist Crosswalk

The HITECH Act and Meaningful Use Implications for Population and Public Health

Core Set of Objectives and Measures Must Meet All 15 Measures Stage 1 Objectives Stage 1 Measures Reporting Method

Achieving Meaningful Use Training Manual

Stage 2 Meaningful Use What the Future Holds. Lindsey Wiley, MHA HIT Manager Oklahoma Foundation for Medical Quality

Proposed Rule for Meaningful Use Stage 2

Meaningful Use Stage 2

MEANINGFUL USE and POPULATION HEALTH

Meaningful Use Qualification Plan

Meaningful Use 2015 and beyond. Presented by: Anna Mrvelj EMR Training Specialist

Meaningful Use Criteria for Eligible Hospitals and Eligible Professionals (EPs)

Meaningful Use Updates. HIT Summit September 19, 2015

Meaningful Use and Lab Related Requirements

Enabling Patients Decision Making Power: A Meaningful Use Outcome. Lindsey Mongold, MHA HIT Practice Advisor Oklahoma Foundation for Medical Quality

Incentives to Accelerate EHR Adoption

EHR Incentive Program Stage 2 Objectives Summary CORE OBJECTIVES (You must meet all objectives unless exclusion applies.)

The EP/eligible hospital has enabled this functionality. At least 80% of all unique patients. seen by the EP or admitted to the

Meaningful Use: Stage 1 and 2 Hospitals (EH) and Providers (EP) Lindsey Mongold, MHA HIT Practice Advisor Oklahoma Foundation for Medical Quality

Meaningful Use Stage 1 and Public Health: Lesson Learned

Summary of the Proposed Rule for the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Records (EHR) Incentive Program (Eligible Professionals only)

Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs- Past, Present, & Future. Travis Broome, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 12/18/2012

Meaningful Use Cheat Sheet CORE MEASURES: ALL REQUIRED # Measure Exclusions How to Meet in WEBeDoctor

HCCN Meaningful Use Review. October 7 th, 2015 Louisiana Public Health Institute Kelly Maggiore Jack Millaway

MDeverywhere, Inc. Presents 2014 CMS EHR Incentive Program Requirements: What Providers Need To Know

Medicaid EHR Incentive Program. Focus on Stage 2. Kim Davis-Allen, Outreach Coordinator

Lunch and Learn IFAF 09/24/11. Michael L. Brody, DPM

Electronic Case Reporting to Public Health An EHR Vendor s Perspective Public Health - EHR Vendors Collaboration Initiative

Where to Begin? Auditing the Current EHR System

Overview of MU Stage 2 Joel White, Health IT Now

Agenda. What is Meaningful Use? Stage 2 - Meaningful Use Core Set. Stage 2 - Menu Set. Clinical Quality Measures (CQM) Clinical Considerations

EHR Incentive Program Stage 3 Objectives & Measures Crosswalk of Stage 3 Proposed Objectives, Measures & Corresponding Stage 2 Measures

Introduction to Public Health Informatics and their Applications

Of EHRs and Meaningful Use. Pat Wise, RN, MA, MS FHIMSS COL (USA ret d) VP, Healthcare Information Systems, HIMSS

Public Health Reporting Initiative Functional Requirements Description

TABLE 4: STAGE 2 MEANINGFUL USE OBJECTIVES AND ASSOCIATED MEASURES SORTED BY CORE AND MENU SET

Medicare and Medicaid Programs; EHR Incentive Programs

Understanding Meaningful Use Stage 2

Stage 1 Meaningful Use - Attestation Worksheet: Core Measures

EMR Name/ Model. Cerner PowerChart Ambulatory (PowerWorks ASP)

Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program. Stage 2 Final Rule Update Part 2

Stage 1 measures. The EP/eligible hospital has enabled this functionality

Transcription:

Bela T. Matyas, MD, MPH Health Officer, Solano County

Electronic submission of community health and other public health data From EMRs, labs, point-of-use devices and other relevant sources To inform community health and public health programs Access to these data (de-identified and/or aggregate, as appropriate) for healthcare providers, academics and the general public Personal data submission, as appropriate Avatars to inform personal health

Statutory Reportable Conditions, Title 17 Syndrome Surveillance data Reportable data under Meaningful Use Vital Statistics Community Health Indicator data Needs Assessment data Public Health Nursing and case management data Jurisdiction-specific data Clinical data for jurisdiction clients

First, leverage Meaningful Use For Syndrome Surveillance, Immunization, ELR data For special registries Then, expand to Statutory Reporting Title 17, Health & Safety Code, local requirements Ultimately, electronic morbidity reporting Finally, expand to Community Health Indicator Data Access to data vs. Use of data Solano approach: the Hub

Maximum ease for data sources; single pipeline Router vs. database (transmission, not storage) Accept data from all source EHRs Data QA and universal data mapping at Hub Route data to any destination Maximum flexibility Maximum scalability Standard, not custom; software-as-a-service Long-term value (indefinite timeframe) Able to share data with partners

All public health data flow to hub, which both translates data (QA) and routes to destinations including CDPH HIE Gateway Subscription Software as a Service model Data available in the cloud or a local copy under the governance of local public health and its partners, or both Allows jurisdiction to focus on internal needs with a single feed from healthcare Allows healthcare to focus on collaboration

Hospital A Other Jurisdictions Regional/Statewide CDC/ASTHO BioSense 2.0 CDPH HIE Gateway CA CAIR CA CalREDIE CA Cancer Registry CA Lead / RASSCLE Hospital B Provider I The Hub Local PHA Router Solano Cloud Copy Provider II Regional HIO Private HIO DOD, VA Solano Hub (Internal)

Single Provider Practice, Clinic Provider Network, Hospital Enterprise HIE Vendor-Based HIE Payer-Based HIE Regional HIE Population and Public Health Hub State and Regional Systems Solano Internal Hub Orders Quest / Clinical Labs Results DOD, VA, Tribal ACKs, Feedback & Data Provenance

Health System Clinical EMR Hospital Provider Network Population and Public Health Hub Solano Internal Hub Behavioral EMR FQHC, DOD & VA Individual Practice HIE Interface (optional) Master Patient Master Provider LIMS Environmental Health Clinical Laboratory POU Diagnostics Public Health ACKs, Feedback & Data Provenance

SDIR Imperial Health System CAIR Hospital Provider Network Population and Public Health Hub Immunization Cancer Case RIDE Other States Regional Reg FQHC, DOD & VA Individual Practice Clinical Laboratory Public Health HIE Interface (optional) Electronic Lab Reporting Childhood Lead Syndrome Surveillance SD webvcmr CDPH CalREDIE Others RASSCLE HMS EpiCenter Collaborate.org Others CDC BioSense JH ESSENCE ACKs, Feedback & Data Provenance

Immunizations Community (Aggregate) Syndrome Surv ELR POU Dx 911 Dispatch Amb Run Data Population and Public Health Hub Policy / Governance Access / Rights Cloud & Desktop Toolkits Regional & Healthcare (De- & Un- Identified) Local Public Health (PHI, De- & Un- Identified) Environ Data ACKs, Feedback & Data Provenance

To LHD Access to all public health data Reduced data entry, more analysis To Partners One data pipeline; reduced reporting costs Collaborate.org site, data visualization To State Clean, consistent reporting; fewer connections

Exposure monitoring Ebola Measles All Conditions Spreadsheets and Access databases Data from many sources the hub has many EMR, Lab, POU diagnostics, Vital measurements, Clinics, Physicians, Individuals Health Evaluation Assessment and Tracking H.E.A.T. - collaboratively developed in 3 weeks Customizations by CD and EPI staff no IT Individual monitoring can convert to clinical cases

Financial incentive to EPs and EHs Access to SS (encounter), ELR and Imm n data Address policy and legal (e.g. BAA) issues Build partnerships Build data highway and, via Hub, QA and routing capacity Capture most hospitals and clinics, many providers

Title 17, Health & Safety Code, Local requirements Expand partners to all hospitals, clinics, providers Expand data from partners Encounter data & ELR for suspect cases EMR data Data on locally-required reporting (e.g. flu, animal bites) Can expand to cancer and childhood lead data Can expand to electronic morbidity reporting Uses the same data highway and Hub

Can use same data highway and Hub to capture broader data Relies heavily on partnerships Reporting of these data voluntary Collaboration site provides value to reporting partners Need BAA, thoughtful consideration of whether data are patient-identifiable, de-identified, or aggregate Seek broader EMR and encounter (beyond SS) data Demographics height, weight, veteran status, etc. Risk Factors smoking, BMI, blood pressure, etc. Diagnoses asthma, diabetes, hypertension, etc.

Can supplement with point-of-use diagnostic data Can supplement with data from non-clinical data sets: finance, census, OSHPD, environmental, etc. Allows richer analysis, sharing of data with partners/public: Layered GIS maps Customized views (e.g. catchment area, neighborhood) Risk factor vs. disease maps (e.g. SES vs. diabetes) Identification of cultural and linguistic health disparities More accurate estimates of disease (e.g. diabetes in Solano) Useful for: Whole Person Care Initiative, tracking chronic diseases, Community Health Assessments, understanding community health, evaluation of interventions, etc.

LHDs can sometimes default to CDPH solutions For MU ELR and Immunization data, Not for SS data For cancer and childhood lead data Likely, in time, For Title 17 and electronic morbidity Not for timely community health indicator data Not for encounter data or for local expanded data Solano County working with UC and Cancer Registry Consortium to define common data sets for risk factors, demographics, social determinants of health and health indicators: useful for all programs Solano Co. working with DOD & VA on data sharing