October 3, 2014
The JASON task force, an independent group of science and technology experts that often advises the federal government, is preparing recommendations for the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC). The recommendations focus on interoperability. The task force plans to suggest a narrower set of requirements for Meaningful Use / MIPS Stage 3 that focuses on interoperability.
The development of the task force is a response to a whitepaper published by the JASON initiative. The whitepaper illustrated the failure of the exchange of health information due to a lack of interoperability across data resources for EHRs. This is an obstacle that needs to be overcome, and the JASON task force aims to address the barriers. These barriers, they believe, are a result of the broad Meaningful Use / MIPS requirements. In a meeting this week, the task force discussed the need for the ONC to focus on imposing Meaningful Use / MIPS requirements that demand interoperability in order to free up provider and vendor resources.
More details on the JASON task force recommendations can be found here.
This week Healthcare IT News published its list of the Best Hospital IT Department winners. The Best Hospital IT Department program starts with hospital nominations. Once the nomination phase closes, employees are asked to take a satisfaction survey. In order to qualify, 50 percent of a department’s staff must complete the survey.and there is only one winner that refers to money as a priority.
Instead of money, it appears that winners attribute fair compensation, teamwork, communication, respect, and accomplishment to their success. According to Healthcare IT News, this is a recurring theme since 2011. This is a lesson that other hospitals should tune into.
Last week, several web publications reported on the results of WEDI’s latest ICD-10 readiness survey, conducted in August 2014. We saw the usual bulleted rundowns on how many vendors have made bits of development progress, how many health plans and providers have completed their impact assessments, how much testing has been done, and so on.
WEDI’s findings are illuminating, especially for ICD-10 professionals who are deep into ICD-10 projects. But to most readers of healthcare industry news reports, the results are just more stats that, for some readers, might mask the bad news — the provider segment of the industry is in the middle of an ICD-10 mess.