Work Begins on National E-health Record Network
|Chief of Staff James Sanders shows an example of an electronic medical record during an interview in his office at the VA Medical Center in Kansas City, MO.
(AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)
James E. Sanders is a big believer of switching patient records from old paper files to sophisticated computer databases. The electronic medical records system at the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Kansas City Medical Center gives Sanders and his staff almost immediate access to medical histories, allowing them to seamlessly treat veterans from other states. However, when patients aren’t in the VA’s system, it could mean hours or days before doctors have crucial information to properly care for patients.
“It’s increasingly frustrating for us and other providers that it’s difficult to find a workable interface,” said Sanders, chief of staff for the Kansas City veterans’ hospital. “Our systems don’t talk to each other.”
Interoperability, or allowing providers to share records and view them from anywhere, is a requirement for facilities to receive some of the more than $17 billion in stimulus funding that the government is offering to encourage the adoption of electronic medical records. Congress will likely penalize providers who aren’t doing so by 2014, cutting their Medicaid and Medicare payments, the Obama administration said.
But the debate over interoperability among health care providers, which has been going on for years, could take well beyond the 2014 timeframe to be solved, industry experts say. “A private sector effort started 11 years ago and is still a going concern,” said Carla Smith, executive vice president of the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society. “Every year they solve an X number of problems. They’re eating the elephant one bite at a time.”
For an integrated system to work, developers at different companies have to agree on how their hundreds of programs uniformly present information and connect with each other. For example, if one uses its own set of abbreviations, the information would be useless to a doctor who uses a different program. As opposed to a “national” system, some envision a “network of networks” that would resemble the model used in the banking industry for customers to access their accounts through ATMs nationwide.
Studies have found that less than 10 percent of U.S. health care providers are using electronic medical records. Sanders, for instance, has access to one of the nation’s most expansive computerized record systems, allowing VA staff to securely access patient data from 1,400 VA hospitals and clinics across the U.S. — but that benefit ends at the medical center’s doors. When a patient isn’t in that system, Sanders said his staff has to revert to receiving the records by fax and then scanning them into the system.
David Blumenthal, the Obama administration’s health information technology director, acknowledged that a national system for sharing records is far off. He said federal officials hope to issue regulations controlling how medical information is shared by the middle of next year and plan to provide about $300 million in stimulus funds to develop regional and local information exchanges. But, he said the government will likely stay out of the thorny issue of exactly how that national system will work.
“We’re very committed to innovation and we’re very aware that the government is not the repository of all wisdom, especially in a field as dynamic as health information technology,” Blumenthal said. “So, we fully expect there will be a lot of different solutions to the exchange problem.”
Regional groups, which use bridge programs to allow health care providers in a city or state to view patient records in each others’ databases, have shown some success hurdling the differences between records software. A survey this year by Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit firm eHealth Initiative found 57 health information exchange groups were operating in the U.S., up from 32 in 2007. At the moment, there are hundreds of programs sold by scores of developers approved by the Certification Commission for Health Information Technology, a nonprofit group that evaluates whether medical record software meets federal and industry standards. With billions of dollars in potential revenue at stake, the vendors have a big incentive to ensure that their products don’t get shut out of a national system. Industry experts say that’s made interoperability a key feature in most new programs.
“If you envision that everyone who has a computerized system can talk to another system in a standardized way, you’ve in essence started to build the foundation of a national network even if it didn’t exist as such,” said Rod Piechowski, senior associate director on policy for the American Hospital Association.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press