Public Sector Influence on institutions and policies: efforts to embrace/incentivize use of  Electronic Health Records (EHRs)Patient Portal

 

 

The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

 

The ACA is the only significant federal law approved in the U.S. that attempts to achieve “comprehensive” health reform, for the purposes of improving access, quality and cost control (McDonough, 2014) . The ACA is divided into 10 titles, 61 sub-titles, and 487 sections to address the integral components of healthcare and to meet the objectives of the law.

To improve access, the ACA is proposing a new structure  to ensure that  US citizens and legal residents will have access to affordable health insurance coverage (McDonough, 2014). To achieve this, Medicaid is expanding for low-income households, and subsidized private insurance for lower and middle income households who cannot obtain insurance elsewhere. The ACA also contains a mandate on most individuals to purchase health insurance or to pay an annual tax penalty (McDonough, 2014).

Several  ACA initiatives will move away from fee-for-service reimbursement that reward medical providers for the volume and quantity of services (McDonough, 2014). Payment models will transition to one that  rewards healthcare providers based on improvements in quality, efficiency, and outcomes of care. New innovative systems will be established by the ACA, some examples are accountable care organizations and patient-centered homes.  These new systems will increase emphasis on health promotion and disease prevention (McDonough, 2014).

The Incentive to Embrace EHRsEHR

In 1996, Congress began encouraging the healthcare community to embrace Health Information Technology (HIT) when it passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA). HIPAA created an electronic data interchange that health plans, healthcare clearinghouses, and certain healthcare providers, are required to use for electronic transactions, which included claims and encounter information, payment and remittance advice, claims status, eligibility, enrollment and disenrollment, referrals and authorizations, coordination of benefits, and premium payment.

In 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was enacted by Congress offering higher Medicare and Medicaid payment to physicians and healthcare organizations who adopt electronic health records (EHRs) and met the criteria for Meaningful Use. The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, enacted as part of the ARRA of 2009, was signed to  promote the adoption and meaningful use of health information technology.  Subtitle D of the HITECH Act addresses the privacy and security concerns associated with the electronic transmission of health information,  through several provisions that strengthen the civil and criminal enforcement of the HIPAA rules.  The HITECH included billions of dollars  in new Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments and millions of dollars for states to develop health information exchanges. The HITECH Act also established a government led process for certification of electronic health records through a $35 billion appropriation for the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT, located in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

Other federal programs designed to incentivize the use of EHRs

In 2006, a  Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) was created.  This is a voluntary physician electronic reporting program that encourages individual eligible professionals (EPs) and group practices to report information on the quality of care to Medicare. PQRS gives participating EPs and group practices the opportunity to assess the quality of care they provide to their patients,  to ensure that patients get the right care at the right time. Under the ACA, this has now become a mandate.  In 2015, Medicare payments are reduced for nonparticipating physicians.

In 2008, the Electronic Prescribing (eRx) Incentive Program was created under the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act which provides incentives for eligible physicians who e-prescribe Medicare Part D medications through a qualified system.  In 2012, this program transitioned to a penalty program for physicians who don’t use eRx.

Additionally, grants were developed under the HITECH act to fund HIT infrastructure and low interest HIT loans. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has awarded millions in federal grant money to more than several hundred projects across the United States to promote access to and encourage HIT adoptions.

Under the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act, several millions in Medicaid transformation grants have been awarded to three states and territories for HIT in the Medicaid program.

The ACA which was enacted in 2010 carried these initiatives even further by establishing uniform standards that HIT systems must meet, including automatic reconciliation of electronic fund transfers and HIPAA payment and remittance, improved claims payment process, consistent methods of health plan enrollment and claim edits, simplified and improved routing of healthcare transactions, and electronic claims attachments.

EHRs and the Disableddisabled.png.doc.docx

In 2010, Health 2.0 and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) announced the launch of a new Investing in Innovations mobile app challenge, the “EHR Accessibility Module Challenge” aimed at providing people with disabilities with access to their health records.

Individuals with disabilities are more likely to report having  poor health compared to those without a disability. This population faces significant difficulties with accessing and receiving healthcare.  HIT and EHRs have tremendous potential to  improving the health outcomes and coordination of care for people with disabilities. The accessibility and usability of HIT can be of concern to people with disabilities, such as  vision, hearing, intellectual, manual dexterity, mental health, developmental and others.

The top 3 videos of the challenge can be viewed by clicking: “EHR Accessibility Module Challenge”.  This is a  great demonstration on how EHRs can benefit people with disabilities.

webLooking to the future

It is evident that significant effort and taxpayer dollars have been dedicated to drive efficient use of HIT and EHRs hoping to streamline our fragmented healthcare system, improve patient safety, increase efficiency, reduce unnecessary tests, and increase coordination of care.

HIT,  EHRs and Meaningful Use are not going away. Vendor products are maturing and improving and new technology is emerging. Acceptance by large and small physician practices and healthcare organizations has gained traction. The public at large has shown acceptance and, in some instances, embraced the technology to be more engaged in their care.

Standardizing the context of patient portals would give patients the information  needed to communicate with their providers so their health issues can be appropriately addressed. It would also assist the disabled patient in garnering critical access to healthcare information.  Patient engagement is in alignment with the overall goals of the ACA in improving access, quality and reducing cost.

References:

McDonough, J. E. (2014). Health system reform in the United States. International Journal of Policy Management, 2, 1-4.

Retrieved from: http://www.ahrq.gov/

Retrieved from: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/PQRS/index.html?redirect=/pqri/

Retrieved from: https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and- Guidance/Legislation/DeficitReductionAct/index.html

Retrieved from: http://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html

Retrieved from: https://www.irs.gov/uac/The-American-Recovery-and-Reinvestment-Act-of-2009:-Information-Center

Retrieved from: http://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/HITECH-act-enforcement-interim-final-rule/index.html

Retrieved from:  http://www.health2con.com/devchallenge/ehr-accessibility-module/#background

 

Patient Portals: Standardized Context

Week 5: 2/8/2016 – 2/15/2016

Historical and Contemporary role of institutions and actors:  Statutory and regulatory mechanisms related to patient health information

 The Role of Institutions/Actors in policy making

Public policy making in the U.S. health domain is a complex process that is highly political.  It is continual and cyclical and is heavily influenced by internal and external factors (Longest, 2010).  There are several players/actors inside of government involved in the process of policy making.  These include the office of  President, his resources and political appointees; civil servants; and Congress (Kingdon, 2011).  Each of the players/actors can influence one another in decision-making, however; some have more influence than others.  The President and his political appointees are critical to agenda setting, but have less control over the alternatives considered and over implementation (Kingdon, 2011).  Civil servants do not have a significant role in agenda setting; however they have more impact on alternatives and implementation.  Congress is central to both agenda setting and alternative specification, although the members have more impact on the agenda while the staffers concentrate on the alternatives (Kingdon, 2011).

 Statutory and regulatory mechanisms related to patient health information

Current State:  Statutory requirements and regulatory requirements are requirements that are mandated by law, and are non-negotiable. Failure to comply could result in a fine or other penalty for the person(s) and/or organizations  for the non-compliance.

According to Longest, (2010),  political  problems that move forward to legislative development are those that policy makers believe are urgent and have a high public interest.  There are a number of laws and regulations at both the federal and state level that govern the confidentiality of health information, including:    

The privacy rule:Access

  • Preempts state law contrary to the privacy rule (exceptions are made if certain conditions are met)
  • Establishes requirements for notice and acknowledgment
  • Establishes an individual’s right to opt out of the facility directory, or to request restrictions to other uses of his or her health information
  • Establishes requirements for use
  • Establishes administrative requirements

 

The Privacy Act of 1974 was designed to give citizens some control over the information collected about them by the federal government and its agencies. It grants people the following rights:privacy

  • to find out what information was collected about them
  • to see and have a copy of that information
  • to correct or amend that information
  • to exercise limited control of the disclosure of that information to other parties

Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records.  This rule establishes additional privacy provisions for records of the identity, diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment of patients maintained in connection with a federally assisted drug or alcohol abuse program.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)  – when Personal Health Information (PHI) is connected to the patient’s legal medical record it is protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule.

Future State:  President Obama has requested a thirty five percent increase in the 2017 budget for cybersecurity and has announced plans to implement a Cybersecurity National Action Plan (CNAP).  The CNAP would take short term actions and develop a long-term strategy to enhance cybersecurity awareness and protections, protect privacy, maintain public safety (as well as economic and national security), and empower Americans to take better control of their digital security.

In order to implement these changes, the federal government is seeking a 2017 budget of greater than $19 billion for cybersecurity.  This will enable agencies to increase their level of cybersecurity, help private sector organizations as well as individuals better protect themselves, deter adversary activity and more effectively respond to incidents.

Another variable to agenda making is the current political circumstance that surrounds the problem.  According to Longest, (2010), the window of opportunity to allow a problem to move forward may depend on what society and existing political bodies currently view as actions of  priority.  With the increase in the number of people using personal health records to manage their health information and become more engaged in their quest for good health, along with the amount of funding being put in place to enhance the security of personal health information, this may be the “window of opportunity” to regulate and standardize the context for patient portals.   

References:

Kingdon, J.W.  (2011).  Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed).  Boston, MA:  Longman.

Longest, B.B. Jr. (2010).  Health policymaking in the United States (5th ed.). Chicago, IL:  Health Administration Press

Retrieved from:  http://www.clinical-innovation.com/topics/privacy-security/obama-announces-cybersecurity-national-action- plan?utm_source=CINW&utm_medium=4141580&utm_content=article&utm_campaign=newsletter_referral

Retrieved from:  https://www.healthit.gov/…/personalhealthrecord-phr-model-privacy-n

Retrieved from:  https://www.healthit.gov/…/can-i-keep-my-own-personalhealthrecords

Retrieved from:  https://patientprivacyrights.org/learn-personalhealthrecords/

Retrieved from:  http://perspectives.ahima.org/patient-access-to-personal-health-information-regulation-vs-reality/#.VruMSZjruJA

Retrieved from: http://www.himss.org/