NUR-621 Implementing Meaningful Use
NUR-621 Implementing Meaningful Use
Implementing Meaningful Use
Electronic health records are the assemblage of patients and populations automatically stored health data and information digitally formatted. In addition, the information is shared and transmitted across network-enabled interfaces (Cowie et al., 2017). The data sharable may include demographics, medical history, medications, laboratory tests outcomes, radiology images, and patients’ statistics, e.g., age, weight, and may consist of billing information. Moreover, electronic health records incentive program avails incentive payments for specific healthcare providers to use electronic health records technology in ways that can impact patient care (Adler-Milstein et al., 2017). The digital health data inducement project demands caregivers to apply the abilities of digitally enabled data records to attain standards by which others may be measured, leading to improved patient care. The essay seeks to describe the stages of meaningful use and their measures. Similarly, it aims to explain the challenges and barriers facilities face in implementing each meaningful use stage. programs seek to offer financial incentives to enhance health care standards and security.
The Digital Health Data Incentive Programs
NUR621 Implementing Meaningful Use
Meaningful use is an expression applied to refer to the minor U.S. government excellence or standard for automated medical information, delineating how digital transmission of the sick person should be shared across caregivers and policy implementers and between physicians and the sick. Its main goal is to boost standards, security and reduce health differences (Lammers et al., 2017). In addition, it seeks to involve the sick and the relatives, enhance care correlations, and populace well-being. Moreover, it strives to safeguard the seclusion and safety of individual medical information. Essentially, the digital health data incentive program avails incentive remittance to particular healthcare providers to use digital medical data technology in ways that can impact patient care (Lammers et al., 2017). The program prompts providers to apply the potentiality of their electronic health records to gain excellence by which others may be measured, leading to improved patient care.
The Stages of Meaningful Use and Their Measures
The 2009 legislation on information technology and health economics boosted the assumption of the digitalization of medical data.
NUR-621 Implementing Meaningful Use
The legislation provides and safeguards sick people’s health seclusion and safety concerns linked with the digital transmission of medical data through the various regulations that reinforce the secular and illegitimate imposition of the HIPPA laws (Lite et al., 2020). Moreover, qualified institutions for the Medicare electronic health record inductive project needed to attain the digital period 1 of health records by 2014 to get remittance. The government entrenched time limits, fixed and sometimes extended both phases (Lite et al., 2020). In the process, the government established institutions dealing with digital medical information and data to motivate clinicians and health institutions to implement meaningful use.
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR-621 Implementing Meaningful Use
Meaningful Use –Stage 1
The first period of the digital health data regulations is categorized into primary targets: the menu set goals, scientific standards regulations, and further scientific standard care regulations.
Menu Set Target Measures.
It required the organizations to meet or exceed the guest’s expectations. In addition, it needed the providers to attain marketing objectives and meet quality excellence and standards. Moreover, the providers were required to be cost-effective and accurate (Elysee et al., 2017). Similarly, the need to balance tradition and innovation was a required objective with the need to match equipment or facilities.
Clinical Quality
Both professional and health institutions were required to upgrade standard security, exhibit ability, and abate medical differences. For meaningful use eligibility, both health professionals and organizations had to apply computerized provider order entry (CPOE) to encode and transmit treatment prescriptions – including lab tests and radiology instruction – through a digital system rather than having hard copy materials. Moreover, the objective was to digitally functionalize medicine –medicine and medicine -allergy interfacing scrutiny through CPOE (Elysee et al., 2017). Similarly, the rule required that they create and relay legitimate instruction digitally. In the same vein, they must record the demographics and the introductory course of death in case of mortality ineligible hospitals.
The healthcare providers and professionals were required to keep the current difficulty list of functioning diagnostics, keep a dynamic list of therapeutics and allergies schedule, put down and illustrate changes in critical intimation, put down smoking reports for clients thirteen and above(Elysee et al., 2017). In addition, the requirement needed implementation of one analytical determination support regulation congruent to elevated analytical precedence together with the capability to trail concessions.
Additional Clinical Quality Care Measures
The additional clinical quality care measure for eligibility required the providers to report roving scientific standard measures. In involving the sick and relatives in their health management, they must avail the sick with their digital health data records and discharge instructions when they ask for it (Elysee et al., 2017). Moreover, they are required to improve care coordination. Hence, they need to digitally share critical scientific data among caregivers, patients, and sanctioned systems.
Measures
The measures entrenched included the requirement of more than thirty percent of invalids with at least one therapeutic management requested through the CPOE. In addition, implementation of medicine –medicine and medicine -allergy interaction is enabled through the entire electronic health records period. Moreover, the requirement needs to have more than 40 percent of all proper instruction transmitted digitally. The regulations required more than eighty percent of at least one entry or indication of unknown challenge or complication, eighty percent of medication lists sent digitally, and one scientific reinforcement regulation (Elysee et al., 2017). For the additional clinical quality care, the measures required to provide an accumulative number, attribute, and prohibition through attestation and digitally submit clinical standard regulations, conduct at least one electronic health records technology capability and conduct or review threat analysis, and implement security updates
Digital Health Record Phase 2
The core objectives of the digital Health Record phase 2 incentives program include scientific procedures and efficacy, logical use of healthcare assets, and public health (Elysee et al., 2017). In addition, it requires care coordination, patient safety, patient and family engagement. The health facilities are required by legislation to meet the measure to be eligible for the incentives.
Measures
The measures require care providers to apply ultra-modern processes into function, enhance health data integration, and embrace regulated figures configuration. The second phase stresses the scientific interchange of information among caregivers and enables invalid interaction.
Digital Health Record–Third Period
Stage three proposed regulation comprising several managerial and technological interchange, together with manageable reporting sessions and an accelerated priority on data standards, electronic health records interoperability, and healthcare diagnostics.
Measures
The regulations require the application of certified electronic health records technology to advance the clinical standard and other principles that need patient electronic access to motivate patient interaction (Lite et al., 2020). The facilities, care providers, and eligible physicians are required to access electronic health records to more than 80% of patients, with the alternative to viewing and downloading information.
Challenges and Barriers Faced by Facilities in Implementing phase 1
Implementation cost toward ambulatory digital data is expensive, and workflow changes have been a challenge. In addition, broadband and upload speed has proven a challenge to many facilities and providers. Similarly, the exhibited resistance is seen among the physicians and lack of support from medical staff. (Lite et al., 2020) The other challenge in implementing the meaningful use accrues from the less interaction between the physicians and the patients and the merger with other systems. The lack of interoperability standards has proven a challenge and a barrier to the implementation.
Challenges and Barriers Faced by Facilities in Implementing phase 2 of EHR Use.
Different facilities and providers experience non-similar challenges due to the diverse nature of the facilities. One of those challenges for many facilities and barriers comprises planning for the change of care requirement and exhorting clients to access the acute care patient portal (Cantor & Thorpe, 2018). Another challenge has been the need to expend a good amount of work to customize the primary functionality into the facilities’ software to accommodate the physician workflow as required. In addition, the patients are not used to accessing the portals to get their information. Moreover, the other barrier is data capture and reporting needed for attestation; it is challenging for the facilities to attest, and know-how vendors come up with figures (Cantor & Thorpe, 2018). Hence the constrain during the analysis to comprehend the details for attestation.
Challenges and Barriers Faced by Facilities in Implementing Phase 3 of Meaningful Use
Studies have shown various barriers and challenges faced by facilities and providers’ endeavors to illustrate digital health data. The facilities have admitted they have struggled to execute and carry out the requirement in several critical ways (Cantor & Thorpe, 2018). These include clinical summary assessment, security and threat analysis, and reporting patient smoking status, which proved to be the main challenges.
Conclusion
There are three fundamental constituents of meaningful use that require the application of approved electronic health records in a relevant way. Secondly, it demanded the electronic interchange of health records to better standards of health services. In addition, the application of approved electronic health records to advance clinical value is required at the third phase of the electronic health records usage. All three stages pose challenges to the facilities and eligible care providers both administratively and technologically. The measures are put in place to ensure the providers implement meaningful use requirements.
References
Adler-Milstein, J., Holmgren, A. J., Kralovec, P., Worzala, C., Searcy, T., & Patel, V. (2017). Electronic health record adoption in U.S. hospitals: the emergence of a digital “advanced use” divide. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 24(6), 1142-1148. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocx080.
Cowie, M. R., Blomster, J. I., Curtis, L. H., Duclaux, S., Ford, I., Fritz, F., … & Zalewski, A. (2017). Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research. Clinical Research in Cardiology, 106(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-016-1025-6
Cantor, M. N., & Thorpe, L. (2018). Integrating data on social determinants of health into electronic health records. Health Affairs, 37(4), 585-590. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1252
Elysee, G., Herrin, J., & Horwitz, L. I. (2017). An observational study of the relationship between meaningful use-based electronic health information exchange, interoperability, and medication reconciliation capabilities. Medicine, 96(41). https://dx.doi.org/10.1097%2FMD.0000000000008274
Lammers, E. J., & McLaughlin, C. G. (2017). Meaningful use of electronic health records and Medicare expenditures: evidence from a panel data analysis of U.S. Health Care Markets, 2010–2013. Health services research, 52(4), 1364-1386. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12550
Lite, S., Gordon, W. J., & Stern, A. D. (2020). Association of the meaningful use electronic health record incentive program with health information technology venture capital funding. JAMA network open, 3(3), e201402-e201402. https://doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1402