Work Group Scales Back Number of Stage 3 Meaningful Use Objectives

Feb. 19, 2014
With feedback from the Health IT Policy Committee that it should scale back the number of objectives in Stage 3 of meaningful use, the Meaningful Use Work Group held a session Feb. 19 to cull several objectives, including several having to do with public health reporting.

With feedback from the Health IT Policy Committee that it should scale back the number of objectives in Stage 3 of meaningful use, the Meaningful Use Work Group held a session Feb. 19 to cull several objectives.

Paul Tang, M.D., co-chair of the committee, said the guidance from the Policy Committee was to reduce the overall number of objectives and focus on patient engagement, care coordination and population health. The MU work group was asked to consider the burdens on physicians and the needs of specialists, and to avoid requirements where standards are not mature. Several of the objectives eliminated have to do with public health reporting. Others involved efforts the committee members have been working on for years.

Earlier in the week, the work group members had taken a quick poll about which objectives to remove and the Feb. 19 meeting went over a discussion of those objectives. Among the objectives the work group voted to remove after the discussion include:

Reminders: Physicians use relevant data to identify patients who should receive reminders for preventive/follow-up care.

eMAR: Hospitals automatically track medications from order to administration using assistive technologies in conjunction with an electronic medication administration record (eMAR).

Medication adherence: Access medication fill information from pharmacy benefit manager and access prescription drug monitoring program data in a streamlined way.

• Imaging: For both EPs (menu) and EHs (core) imaging results should be included in the EHR. Access to the images themselves should be available through the EHR (e.g., via a link).

Case reports to prompt when criteria are met for public health case reporting.

• Electronic lab reporting to public health:  Core: EHs and CAHs submit electronic reportable laboratory results, for the entire reporting period, to public health agencies, except where prohibited, and in accordance with applicable law and practice.

• Syndromic surveillance: EP (menu) Eligible Hospitals and CAHs (core) submit syndromic surveillance data for the entire reporting period from CEHRT to public health agencies, except where prohibited, and in accordance with applicable law and practice.

• Family history: Eligible professionals and hospitals record patient family health history as structured data for one or more first-degree relatives.

The group voted to retain objective recommendations related to clinical decision support, hospital labs, registries and unique device identifiers. The work group plans to refine its recommendations to the Policy Committee around the remaining objectives.

Sponsored Recommendations

How Digital Co-Pilots for patients help navigate care journeys to lower costs, increase profits, and improve patient outcomes

Discover how digital care journey platforms act as 'co-pilots' for patients, improving outcomes and reducing costs, while boosting profitability and patient satisfaction in this...

5 Strategies to Enhance Population Health with the ACG System

Explore five key ACG System features designed to amplify your population health program. Learn how to apply insights for targeted, effective care, improve overall health outcomes...

A 4-step plan for denial prevention

Denial prevention is a top priority in today’s revenue cycle. It’s also one area where most organizations fall behind. The good news? The technology and tactics to prevent denials...

Healthcare Industry Predictions 2024 and Beyond

The next five years are all about mastering generative AI — is the healthcare industry ready?