{"id":22508,"date":"2023-07-20T02:30:07","date_gmt":"2023-07-20T10:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/2023\/07\/20\/news-16238\/"},"modified":"2023-07-20T02:30:07","modified_gmt":"2023-07-20T10:30:07","slug":"news-16238","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/2023\/07\/20\/news-16238\/","title":{"rendered":"Medical data sharing: Are we there yet?"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

Fifteen years ago, if you entered an emergency room a thousand miles from home<\/a>, the ER doctors would not have had access to potentially lifesaving information in your medical records, such as your allergies or a list of drugs you were taking. Only 10% of US hospitals had electronic health record (EHR) systems, and health record requests were typically sent in paper form by mail or fax machine<\/a>. Then the federal government stepped in, providing billions of dollars in EHR incentives<\/a> to help hospitals get online.<\/p>\n

Micky Tripathi, national coordinator for health IT, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology<\/p>\n

\u201cToday, 96% of hospitals and 85% of ambulatory providers [and] physician offices use EHRs,\u201d says Micky Tripathi, national coordinator for health IT at the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) under the US Department of Health and Human Services.<\/p>\n

ONC has created standards for EHR systems, provided certifications for compliant EHR products that qualify for incentives, and created standards for sharing EHR system data sets. Until recently, however, the data in those systems has largely remained in silos, with limited accessibility.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s been changing with the rise of regional, national, and vendor-driven health information exchange networks. About 70% of all hospitals and ambulatory providers are sharing records electronically over national interoperability networks, says Tripathi, but have fallen short of providing complete access to patient data from all providers. The planned rollout later this year of government-certified Qualified Health Information Networks (QHINs), which Tripathi says will function as a \u201cnetwork of networks\u201d for sharing health data nationwide, should help push participation levels higher. \u00a0<\/p>\n

However, the scope of what nationwide health information exchange networks offer today is largely limited to treatment, and data is limited to basic information, such as demographics, medication lists, problems and allergies, recent labs, and most recent visit summaries. While radiology reports may be included, images are not. Also, information is shared in document form rather than as discrete data elements, which limits the granularity of data requests. And participation in data exchanges remains optional for all stakeholders, including healthcare providers, payers, and patients.<\/p>\n

While many hospitals are connected to nationwide health information exchange networks today, about 30% still don\u2019t participate in nationwide data-sharing networks, \u201cprobably due to technical limitations of their EHR systems, lack of staff expertise or capacity, lack of resources to connect, and so on,\u201d says Tripathi.<\/p>\n

Paul Wilder, executive director, CommonWell Health Alliance<\/p>\n

Many of those are smaller providers, says Paul Wilder, executive director at CommonWell Health Alliance, one of the QHIN candidates. \u201cWhen it comes to smaller practices, we have a lot of work to do,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n

Also, patients and payers (health insurers, Medicare, Medicaid, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and so on) can\u2019t directly access information on most exchanges today. Payers tend to use many point-to-point connections, he says.<\/p>\n

Technology issues aren\u2019t the only barrier. The culture in hospitals and other healthcare providers, and a preference for existing workflows, have slowed both the adoption and use of information sharing networks.<\/p>\n

For now, electronic health records remain fragmented among hospitals, doctors\u2019 offices, pharmacies, walk-in clinics, home health providers, hospice organizations, long-term care givers, dental offices, chiropractors, emergency response teams, and other healthcare providers. \u201cThis is still a mass-fragmentation moment,\u201d says Neal Batra, future of health lead at Deloitte Consulting.<\/p>\n

A flurry of activity in the last few years has set the stage for nationwide provider access to clinical patient health data at any time, anywhere in the United States. \u201cMuch progress has been made in the last five years, says John Halamka, president, Mayo Clinic Platform.<\/p>\n

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the interoperability rule<\/a> in 2020, removing barriers that prevented patients from accessing their health information. As part of its 21st Century Cures Act: Interoperability, Information Blocking, and the ONC Health IT Certification Program Final Rule<\/em><\/a>, ONC also issued version 1 of the US Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) standards<\/a>, to which vendors must comply to be certified by the ONC. (Healthcare providers qualify for incentives only when they purchase certified EHR systems.)<\/p>\n

Then, in 2021, the information blocking rule went into effect, requiring EHR system vendors, providers, and other parties to share data specified in USCDI v1. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)<\/a> \u201cdefined where organizations can exchange information without having to get consent from the patient,\u201d ONC\u2019s Tripathi says. \u201cYou were permitted<\/em> to share information with other parties involved in treatment, payment, and operations, but not obligated to do so. Now, in areas where providers, EHR vendors, and health information networks are permitted to share information, they are required<\/em> to do so.\u201d And in 2022 the rule was expanded<\/a> to include data beyond that specified in the USCDI.<\/p>\n

In 2022 ONC also published the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement<\/a> (TEFCA), a 21st Century Cures Act requirement to \u201cestablish a universal floor for interoperability across the country,\u201d along with the Qualified Health Information Network Technical Framework, which set in motion the process for existing health information networks to apply for designation as QHINs under TEFCA.<\/p>\n

Healthcare providers can choose to work through any one of the QHINs to access clinical patient data for treatment purposes. (Version 1 of TEFCA, released in January 2022, authorizes six exchange purposes \u2014 Treatment, Payment, Health Care Operations, Individual Access Services, Public Health, and Government Benefits Determination.)<\/p>\n

Lisa Stump, chief information and digital transformation officer, Yale New Haven Health<\/p>\n

The official QHINs, which should gain final approval starting later this year, include Epic TEFCA Interoperability Services, CommonWell Health Alliance, Kno2, KONZA, Health Gorilla, Carequality, and MedAllies.<\/p>\n

Providers need only join one exchange to access all records in the network. If they choose to participate, they can then access basic patient data from other providers and, if they feel that the data is relevant and trustworthy, pull it into their own EHR systems, says Lisa Stump, chief information and digital transformation officer at Yale New Haven Health.<\/p>\n

Most providers today have access to health information exchanges (HIEs) for EHR data sharing, but those were developed to serve different constituencies. CommonWell Health Alliance, for example, was initially launched by a handful of competing EHR vendors including Cerner (now Oracle Health), while Epic Systems created Care Everywhere for users of its products and is involved in another vendor consortium, called Carequality, for data exchange outside of its network.<\/p>\n

The eHealth Exchange serves government agencies, some EHR system vendors, and some individual providers through connections to state and regional HIEs \u2014 for example, Yale New Haven Health participates in the State of Connecticut\u2019s Connie HIE<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Dr. Steven Lane, chief medical officer, Health Gorilla<\/p>\n

Health Gorilla has focused on connecting small providers that couldn\u2019t afford EHR systems from market leaders Cerner and Epic. \u201cHealth Gorilla grew up as a venture-backed startup to address interoperability problems faced by small office providers,\u201d says Dr. Steven Lane, chief medical officer.<\/p>\n

As a QHIN, he says, the firm will support patient access leveraging the TEFCA \u201cindividual access services\u201d use case. (Not all QHINs will, he adds.) Committed to serving the needs of providers that historically have been excluded from nationwide interoperability, Health Gorilla also intends to provide QHIN services to providers in home health, hospice, long-term care, dental offices, and chiropractors, as well as physicians using EHRs and other health IT systems that have not historically been able to access connectivity services, including HIEs.<\/p>\n

Today\u2019s exchanges and the coming QHINs take somewhat different approaches to providing data, says Lane. \u201cMost HIEs act as a centralized data repository, while QHINs will be of two types: Some will exclusively pass through data from one data holder to another, while others will aggregate, normalize, maintain, and curate patient data in the manner of regional HIEs.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kathryn Bingman, vice president of interoperability adoption, eHealth Exchange<\/p>\n

In the EHR systems space, there are literally hundreds of smaller players out there, especially those focused on specialties, says Kathryn Bingman, vice president of interoperability adoption at eHealth Exchange \u2014 so many healthcare providers don\u2019t use the major EHR systems that are connected to the exchanges, and some still don\u2019t use EHR systems at all.<\/p>\n

For providers that do have an EHR system, the various exchanges available today provide access to limited clinical data for most patients in the country. \u201ceHealth Exchange participation includes about 75% of hospitals in the US, plus five federal agencies,\u201d says Bingman.<\/p>\n

CommonWell claims to be the largest exchange, with 80% of providers connected to its network and access to 208 million patient records, according to executive director Paul Wilder.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile most hospitals are connected today, a lot of people in those hospitals don\u2019t know that, and the workflows haven\u2019t been solidified,\u201d says Wilder at CommonWell.<\/p>\n

Yale New Haven Health is connected to the Connie exchange, as well as CommonWell, Care Everywhere, and a few smaller, proprietary vendor repositories. Remote patient EHR data is accessible, but it\u2019s still up to clinicians to access it, says Stump. And while most clinicians access some part of a remote record 80% of the time, \u201cthere are other areas at the other end of the spectrum, where the outside record is accessed far less often. It only happens there 20% of the time,\u201d she says. \u201cWe still have work to do in optimally utilizing external data when available.\u201d<\/p>\n

While Stump is still investigating the reasons why some clinicians aren\u2019t making full use of data exchanges, changing established culture and workflows may be part of the challenge. \u201cMany providers don\u2019t even know that there\u2019s a button they can press,\u201d says Wilder. \u201cThe technology is in place, but they don\u2019t know it\u2019s there.\u201d<\/p>\n

Tripathi calls this the \u201clast mile\u201d issue. \u201cFront-line staff need to move away from their instinct, which is to use paper and fax<\/a>,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s also possible that some clinicians simply haven\u2019t gotten into the habit of checking, Stump says. \u201cBut I\u2019m also hearing from clinicians that the format of the data doesn\u2019t always make it easy for a physician, in the moment, to get at the salient points. Clinicians say they feel that the continuity of care document [the CCD<\/a>, which contains the patient\u2019s clinical information summary] is cluttered and doesn\u2019t always have what they believe are the most relevant pieces of information.\u201d<\/p>\n

Today, that document includes several sections containing basic information on such things as advance directives, alerts, encounters, family history, functional status, immunizations, medical equipment, medications, payers, plan of care, problems, procedures, purpose, results, social history, and vital signs, according to the DHS.<\/p>\n

Additionally, it will take some time before clinicians trust the baseline patient data that comes in through the exchanges. \u201cThere\u2019s no trust that the data is complete,\u201d says Wilder. \u201cThe 20% that might be missing might be the most important, so they often request both electronic and paper records,\u201d especially for critical areas of practice, such as cardiology.<\/p>\n

Next page: The document problem, gaps in the system, more \u2192<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.computerworld.com\/category\/security\/index.rss<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Fifteen years ago, if you entered an emergency room a thousand miles from home<\/a>, the ER doctors would not have had access to potentially lifesaving information in your medical records, such as your allergies or a list of drugs you were taking. Only 10% of US hospitals had electronic health record (EHR) systems, and health record requests were typically sent in paper form by mail or fax machine<\/a>. Then the federal government stepped in, providing billions of dollars in EHR incentives<\/a> to help hospitals get online.<\/p>\n

To read this article in full, please click here<\/a><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<\/article>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","footnotes":""},"categories":[11062,10643],"tags":[12534,11063,21665,29256,18118],"class_list":["post-22508","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-computerworld","category-independent","tag-compliance","tag-data-privacy","tag-electronic-health-records","tag-healthcare-industry","tag-hipaa"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22508","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22508"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22508\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22508"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22508"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22508"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}