HIT Standards CommitteeHIT Standards Committee

Summary of HIT Policy Committee Summary of HIT Policy Committee Recommendations fromRecommendations from

August 14, 2009 MeetingAugust 14, 2009 Meeting

August 20, 2009

John GlaserOffice of the National Coordinator

HIT Policy CommitteeHIT Policy Committee

Meaningful Use Workgroup UpdateMeaningful Use Workgroup Update

Paul Tang

Palo Alto Medical Foundation

George Hripcsak

Columbia University

August 14, 2009

Timeline for Next 12 Months – MU WGTimeline for Next 12 Months – MU WG

• 3Q09: Develop process for updating meaningful use objectives and measures– Tag 2011 measures relevant to specialties

• 4Q09: Conduct informational hearings to inform 2013 and 2015 criteria development

• 1Q10: Update 2013 and 2015 criteria• 2Q10: Work with HIT Standards committee to ascertain

availability of relevant standards• 3Q10: Refine 2013 meaningful use criteria• 4Q10: Assess industry preparedness for meeting 2011

and initial 2013 meaningful use criteria

Meaningful Use Update ProcessMeaningful Use Update Process

• Continue to use National Priorities Partnership (NPP) framework for meaningful use criteria

• Work with NPP and HealthyPeople programs to identify HIT-sensitive objectives and measures appropriate for meaningful use criteria (exemplars) in 2013 and 2015

• Gather public input on identified gaps in measures needed for MU criteria– Examples: specialists, smaller practices and hospitals, safety-

net providers, patient-supplied information

• Assess industry initial response to 2011 MU program• Refine 2013 and 2015 MU criteria• Address barriers to EHR adoption and mitigation

strategies

HIT Policy CommitteeHIT Policy Committee

Review of Initial Recommendations by the Certification and Adoption Workgroup

Paul Egerman

Marc Probst, Intermountain Healthcare

August 14, 2009

Recommendation 1 – Focus on Meaningful UseRecommendation 1 – Focus on Meaningful Use

• Implement a New Certification Process: Focus on Meaningful Use Objectives at a high level, less specificity

• Increase Specificity on Interoperability

• Comprehends that Optional Certifications may exist - Marketplace Advisory Services

Recommendation 2 – Progress on Security, Privacy, and Interoperability

• Address all privacy and security policies described in ARRA and HIPAA, including audit trails and consent.

• Aggressively establish new, very specific requirements for Interoperability and data exchange.

• Create “test harnesses” that will enable purchasers easily self-test their software.

Recommendation 3 – Objective and Transparent Process

• Separate Criteria definition from certification testing

• Allow Multiple Certification organizations

• With the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), establish accreditation organization and process

Recommendation 4 – Flexible Software Sources

• Ensure that all EHR systems are certified against identical criteria, regardless of source

• Provide flexible processes for non-vendor software

• Provide for certification of components so EHRs can be purchased from multiple sources

Recommendation 5 – Short Term Transition

• Leverage existing Certification work, whenever possible

• Establish Preliminary Certification Process so work can commence prior to completion of regulatory process

• For products that completed 2008 certification, permit an incremental certification process against “Gap Criteria,” which includes privacy review

HIT Policy CommitteeHIT Policy Committee

Health Information Exchange WorkgroupHealth Information Exchange Workgroup

Deven McGrawCenter for Democracy & Technology

Micky TripathiMassachusetts eHealth Collaborative

August 14, 2009

Recommendations – HIE Workgroup

Information exchange requirements

There should be core information exchange requirements that are technology- and architecture-neutral and would apply to all participants seeking to demonstrate meaningful use to CMS

Core Requirements Consistent with the recommendations of the Certification Workgroup, these core requirements should be focused on the capability to achieve meaningful use and include interoperability, privacy, and security

Certification of interoperability components

Federal government should certify EHR and health information exchange components on these core requirements to ease burden on eligible professionals and hospitals for meeting and demonstrating adherence with meaningful use requirements

Aligning federal and state efforts and bringing existing efforts into alignment

Federal and state-government approaches should be complementary, and grants to states should require alignment with federal meaningful use objectives and measures