Quality e-Newsletter
Intelligence Unit Special Reports Special Events Subscribe Sponsored Departments Follow Us

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn RSS

Proposed MU Rules Draw Strong Reaction

Margaret Dick Tocknell, for HealthLeaders Media, May 9, 2012

Premier Health Alliance, which represents more than 2,600 hospital members:
Premier supports the CMS decision to extend Stage 1 MU, but wants CMS to publish a final rule specifying Stage 2 requirements by August 2012 warning that failure to do so will "seriously compromise the ability of the healthcare community to meet Stage 2 requirements beginning in 2014." If the August deadline can't be met, Premier recommends that Stage 1 be continued for an additional year, and that Stage 2 begin in 2015.

Premier likes the proposal that hospitals report clinical quality measures from a menu of options but asks that the CQM be reduced to 15 instead of the proposed 24. "Our alliance members have encountered significant difficulties in complying with the 15-measure requirement in Stage 1, in some cases due to problems with the performance of certified EHR technology, and we believe it would be more prudent to retain a 15-measure reporting requirement for Stage 2 rather than overreach."

It would like to see timeline for online access be two business days rather than 36 hours after discharge. "A measure based on full days would be simpler than one based on hours post-discharge, since discharges can occur throughout the day, making for a potential compliance nightmare."

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Comments are moderated. Please be patient.

1 comments on "Proposed MU Rules Draw Strong Reaction"


Jim (5/9/2012 at 10:21 AM)
It seems to me that patient access to records should be via an HIE. The HIE should be able to aggregate records from all providers and provide a single consistent point of access for the patient. Also, if a large percentage of patients are going to access their records on-line how many people will we need to hire to man a help desk to reset credentials, provide help, and I can only imaging the number of questions in interpreting the results. Now, this may be a good thing for some patients, but it is going to be expensive and will certainly expose many patients PHI to the wrong parties.