Physicians Eager but Unprepared to Meet Meaningful Use Requirements

Most physicians were eligible for federal incentives in 2011, but few had EHR systems that met Meaningful-use criteria.

Meaningful use (MU), in a health information technology (HIT) context, defines the use of electronic health records (EHR) and related technology within a healthcare organization. Achieving meaningful use also helps determine whether an organization will receive payments from the federal government under either the Medicare EHR Incentive Program or the Medicaid EHR Incentive Program.

Although roughly half of physicians in a recent survey said they planned to apply to the Meaningful Use incentive program in 2011, few would have qualified for payments because their electronic health record systems would not have met enough of the Stage 1 core requirements, according to a study published this week in Health Affairs.

Of nearly 4,000 physicians responding to the survey, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics, 51 percent said they intended to apply for the incentive payments. Only 11 percent, however, had an EHR system installed that would have met 10 out of 15 requirements for the Stage 1′s core objectives.

Such statistics should serve as a guide to current and future efforts by regional extension centers (RECs) designated to aid physicians in their push toward meeting Meaningful Use, according to the study’s authors. Physicians working with RECs toward Meaningful Use attestation have encountered multiple obstacles, according to analysis from earlier in the year by the ONC’s Health IT Policy Committee.

“The 2011 survey results portray widespread gaps in readiness,” the authors wrote. “Even in Wisconsin, the state with the highest percentage ready [to hit 10 of 15 core requirements], only 32 percent of all physicians reported this degree of readiness.”

Despite the results of the Health Affairs study, the number of eligible hospitals and professionals registered to participate in the EHR Incentive Programs continues to climb, according to recent statistics released by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Additionally, according to CMS’s statistics, $4.5 billion in incentive payments have been made to eligible providers as of this past March.

View Health Affairs Abstract for more information – click here.
Original article content courtesy of FierceHealthIT.

Day 1 At The Court: Is Time Right For Health Law Review?

Today’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court will focus on whether an 1867 law — the Anti-Injunction Act – allows the court to consider the challenges to the health law before the individual mandate provision takes effect in 2014.

The Washington Post: Supreme Court To Hear Arguments On Timing Of Health-Care Ruling
The Supreme Court begins its constitutional review of the health-care overhaul law Monday with a fundamental question: Is the court barred from making such a decision at this time? The justices will hear 90 minutes of argument about whether an obscure 19th-century law — the Anti-Injunction Act — means that the court cannot pass judgment on the law until its key provisions go into effect in 2014. It is the rare issue on which both sides agree: the Obama administration lawyers and those representing the states and private organization challenging the new law argue that the Supreme Court should decide the constitutional question now (Barnes, 3/25).

The New York Times: Health Act Arguments Open With Obstacle From 1867
The Supreme Court on Monday starts three days of hearings on the constitutionality of the 2010 health care overhaul law, an epic clash that could recast the very structure of American government. But it begins with a 90-minute argument on what a lawyer in the case has called “the most boring jurisdictional stuff one can imagine.” The main event — arguments over the constitutionality of the law’s requirement that most Americans obtain insurance or pay a penalty — will not come until Tuesday (Liptak, 3/26).

Stateline: Supreme Court Hears First Issue: Jurisdiction
If the Medicaid portion of the health law is upheld, the work of expanding Medicaid access will be squarely on states’ shoulders, although the initial financial burden will be primarily on Washington. States have already been laying the groundwork for the Medicaid expansion, because waiting until the court decides would mean missing the law’s deadlines. For the same reason, most states have been developing so-called health insurance exchanges, the law’s central mechanism for extending health care access to millions of uninsured Americans (Vestal, 3/26).

Fox News: First Round Of Supreme Court Health Care Hearings Not About Health Care
For all the anticipation leading up to this week’s historic arguments, Monday morning’s opener at the Supreme Court isn’t about the law itself. It’s about the rules of the game. The day may prove disappointing to anyone looking for a vigorous constitutional argument or a hint of how the justices will ultimately rule on the merits of the dispute. Still, the fate of the case rests on this opening round (Ross, 3/26).

Bloomberg: Court Opens Health-Care Debate With Law That Might Derail Case
The U.S. Supreme Court opens today its historic review of President Barack Obama’s health- care law, three days of arguments that might result in the president’s premier legislative achievement being found unconstitutional in the middle of his re-election campaign. The court will determine the fate of a measure designed to extend insurance to about 32 million people and revamp an industry that accounts for 18 percent of the U.S. economy. The six hours of planned debate is the most on a case in 44 years (Stohr, 3/26).

NewsHour: Health Care Reform Heads To The Supreme Court: A Guide To Day 1
Between Monday and Wednesday, the justices will consider several issues, including whether it’s constitutional for the federal government to force Americans either to buy health insurance or pay a fine. … What can we expect on the first day of arguments in this historic case? (Kane, 3/26).

 

Summaries courtesy of  Kaiser Health News’ Daily Report

The Hardest Job To Fill (And Keep) – CMS Chief

President Obama is fighting to save his signature health law on two fronts: in the Supreme Court and on the campaign trail, where Republican candidates are promising to kill the Affordable Care Act.

Photos by Getty Images and Associated Press

 Yet even if the president prevails, he faces another daunting challenge: implementing the law in a seamless, timely manner. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is charged with making the health law work, drafting regulations, setting up new programs and providing oversight. But for years Congress has undermined the agency’s leadership and potential effectiveness, raising questions about its capabilities and resources even as the health law ramps up its responsibilities.

For starters: consider the revolving door leadership at CMS.

Since its creation in 1977 as the Health Care Financing Administration, the agency has had 29 administrators in 35 years – an average tenure of just 14 months. The longest-serving administrator held the job for four years and five months. The shortest: two months.

The most recent CMS administrator, Dr. Donald Berwick, resigned in December after 16 months. His replacement, Marilyn Tavenner, currently holds the title of acting administrator. That’s hardly uncommon.

Acting administrators have run the agency 20 percent of the time. And the trend appears to be increasing: the Senate hasn’t confirmed a full-time CMS administrator since 2006, when Mark McClellan resigned midway through the second Bush administration.

“Imagine if somebody went two years without a Secretary of Defense,” Thomas A. Scully, who was CMS administrator under President George W. Bush, told the journal Health Affairs in April 2010.

For decades, government and private researchers have pointed to a widening gap between the agency’s responsibilities and resources. As the largest purchaser of health care in the world, with a budget of $820 billion, CMS pays for the care of one in three Americans, and interacts daily with thousands of hospitals, doctors and other providers.

4,900 vs. 62,000 Employees

The number of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries has soared since the programs started in 1966, with tens of millions of Baby Boomers and uninsured expected to swell the rolls even more in coming years. Yet today the agency has the same number of employees it had during the during the Carter administration – about 4,900.

By comparison, the Social Security Administration, with a smaller budget, has 62,000 employees. Even including work that CMS outsources to private contractors – bill-paying, coverage decisions and quality oversight – the agency operates with about half as many employees as Social Security.

The shortages have hurt the agency’s ability to implement crucial reforms, ensure adequate oversight of hospitals and other providers and find ways to stem spiraling medical costs, researchers say. For years, CMS executives weren’t even sure if they could consider cost as part of their coverage decisions, paying high-quality and low-quality providers the same amount.

In 1999, a bipartisan group of former administrators and health policy experts wrote an open letter to Congress decrying “the mismatch” between the agency’s resources and its “mammoth assignment.”

Three years later, the nonprofit National Academy of Social Insurance wrote, “This mismatch has grown worse in recent years as CMS’ responsibilities have increased dramatically.”

“Really, when you consider what they have to work with, they do a fairly remarkable job,” adds Robert A. Berenson, a former CMS administrator, and now a health researcher at the Urban Institute. “Assuring adequate staff at CMS has not been a priority for Congress even though it might more than pay for itself in more efficient programs.”

‘What’s Missing Is … A Consolidated Strategic Vision’

Berwick, a physician and national expert on health quality, said he was “impressed and gratified” by the way senior staff rallied around his calls to implement the sprawling health law. But much of staff time is taken up writing rules and regulations.

Career executives “perform these core components well,” said Berwick. “What’s missing is a kind of coherence and consolidated strategic vision of where to head next.”

In recent years, Congress has added more programs and complex legislation to the agency’s plate, including overseeing a 2003 prescription drug benefit for seniors, ensuring patient privacy, helping to weed out waste and fraud and developing a system for grading hospitals and nursing homes.

The Obama administration’s nearly two-year-old health law adds yet more duties: helping to oversee insurance exchanges in 50 states, operating a program to spur ways of delivering care more efficiently, and guiding big expansions of Medicare and Medicaid, the agency’s core programs.

CMS will be expected to do so even as “frequent changes” at the top “have inhibited the implementation of long-term Medicare initiatives or the pursuit of a consistent management strategy,” according to a 2000 study by the U.S. General Accounting Office.

For years, the agency was criticized for focusing more on getting checks out to hospitals and doctors than ensuring quality or finding ways to trim health spending. Part of that had to do with Medicare’s unique history. For the first 11 years of its existence, the program was housed in the Social Security Administration, which issues monthly income support checks to retired Americans.

But even after the Medicare and Medicaid programs were put under one roof in 1977, the agency continued to struggle, facing criticism from Congress and medical providers. “It’’s almost paradoxical the extent to which Medicare is so important and valued in the lives of so many families and communities, and the overwhelming communication the people running the program get is hostility,” said Bruce Vladeck, an administrator in the Clinton administration.

Not Just A Check-Writing Agency

Gail Wilensky, who ran the agency for two years under President George H.W. Bush, said CMS has evolved into a much more sophisticated operation. “It’s not just a check-writing agency anymore,” she said. But the turnover at the top sends the wrong message to employees, who respond by being “more inward and protective.”

The CMS administrator’s position is a political appointment requiring Senate confirmation. Berwick’s name surfaced as a potential CMS leader shortly after Obama’s election. A pediatrician by training, Berwick gradually shifted his focus to quality improvement, steering the nationally recognized Institute for Healthcare Improvement, a nonprofit based near Boston.

The Obama administration waited to submit his name for the CMS position until April 2010, one month after it won passage of the Affordable Care Act. By then, Republicans were openly attacking the legislation as unduly burdensome and costly. Berwick never did get a Senate hearing and was appointed by the president during the congressional recess that July.

The recess appointment avoided what many predicted would be a losing battle with Senate Republicans. Some of them accused Berwick of promoting rationing, based on favorable comments he had made in the past about the British National Health System. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said Berwick’s focus on cutting costs would lead to a rural health system consisting “of a Band-Aid and a bed pan.”

In an interview, Berwick said Republicans “twisted and distorted” his words and used the agency as “a political football. It’s a game to them,” he said. Berwick added that the churn in administrators “demoralizes and confuses” senior staff and hurts the agency’s ability to develop a consistent long-term vision. “What happens, I think, when you have a lot of turnover is senior staff loses its confidence and is less willing to take risks.”

Wilensky said she was “especially frustrated” with what happened to Berwick. “I like Don Berwick. I don’t always agree with him but I have a lot of respect for what he has done and for his passion for the great issues he takes on.”

Berwick had little choice except to resign. His acting term was set to expire at the end of 2011 and 42 Republican senators had already announced their intentions to block his confirmation as a full-time administrator. The administration nominated Tavenner, a former Virginia health official and executive with the for-profit Hospital Corporation of America, just days later.

Several prominent Republicans, including Republican House Majority leader, Eric Cantor, said Tavenner was “eminently qualified” to run the agency. But months later Tavenner still hasn’t gotten a hearing and, with the heated politics of an election year, some wonder if she will.

 

 

By Gilbert M. Gaul Kaiser Health News

This story was produced in collaboration with The Washington Post

Success of Health Reform Hinges on Hiring 30,000 Primary Care Doctors by 2015

On a chilly afternoon at a community clinic in Southeast Washington, three young doctors are busily laying the foundation for the health-care law’s success.

Jacob Edwards flips through a manual on skin conditions, diagnosing a rash that looks like chicken pox. Jessica O’Babatunde consults her supervisor on treating an adolescent’s obesity, which is literally off-the-charts. And Julie Krueger peppers 3-year-old Daphauni with questions at her physical: How do you spell your name? What did you eat for breakfast? What’s your favorite vegetable? (Cheese.)

Primary Care Physicians

They are primary-care residents at Children’s National Medical Center. A third of their class has more than $200,000 each in student loan debt. At the end of residency, they can stay in primary care and earn $29.58 an hour. Or they can specialize and make $74.45. Over a lifetime, a medical student who specializes can expect to earn $3.5 million more.

The Obama administration — and, arguably, the American health-care system — desperately needs them to choose primary care. [Read more...]

Health Organizations Increasingly Hiring Chief Nursing Information Officers CNIOs

Chief Nursing Information Officer (CNIO) is a fairly new title, but it is growing in popularity and more and more organizations are recruiting for the position, according to Linda Hodges, vice president and leader of information technology search practice at executive search firm Witt/Kieffer.

An increasing number of nurses are setting their sites specifically on attaining a CNIO position, Hodges told Healthcare IT News in an exclusive interview.

“This is something that has become a passion for many people who went into nursing but also love IT,” she said. “They can see how this role can impact care, especially with the evolving new role of accountable care organizations.”

“Nurses can see the need for an executive nurse focused on nursing needs and nursing practice, so that when health IT solutions are crafted for an organization, they will work for the nurses,” Hodges said.

If the CNIO title follows the course of the CMIO title, it might take some time to become accepted. According to Hodges, the title of chief medical information officer was ten years in the making. It wasn’t readily accepted at first.

Currently, academic institutions and large integrated health systems are the main organizations hiring such a position. A CNIO at a large system can expect to make from $200,000 to $250,000 in base pay annually, she said.

Nurses pursuing this position need a master’s degree in nursing informatics and in some cases a Phd, Hodges said. There are a number of good schools offering highly regarded programs, including the University of Maryland, Vanderbilt and Duke.

“The education programs that exist in nursing informatics need to evolve,” she said. “There is a lot of interest right now, and they are beginning to see traction in terms of more people.”

Hodges will be co-presenting a session titled “The Emerging Role of the Chief Nursing Information Officer: What is the Current State” at the Nursing Informatics Symposium at HIMSS12 on Feb. 20 in Las Vegas.

 

Article origination by Diana Manos at HealthcareIT News

Mandatory Overtime Caps for Nurses Having Effect

State-mandated caps on nurses’ mandatory overtime hours have been effective in reducing overtime hours for new RNs, according to a study.

The study is part of the RN Work Project, a 10-year longitudinal study of newly licensed RNs (NLRNs) that began in 2006 and is funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The overtime study drew on data from nurses in 34 states, covering 51 metropolitan areas and nine rural areas.

Past research has demonstrated that fatigue caused by long hours without sufficient rest between shifts can lead to mistakes that imperil both patients and nurses.

“The purpose of capping mandatory overtime is to make hospitals safer for patients and nurses,” study investigator Carol Brewer, RN, PhD, FAAN, professor at the University of Buffalo School of Nursing, said in a news release. “Nurses routinely work long shifts, often as long as 12 hours straight. These laws were intended to prevent hospitals from piling mandatory overtime on top of such shifts, a practice that research shows can increase the likelihood of mistakes. The laws seem to be accomplishing their objective.”

According to the study, in 2010, 16 states had rules restricting mandatory overtime hours for nurses: Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Washington and West Virginia. At issue in the study was the extent to which those laws or regulations had actually affected the workplace. Researchers examined NLRNs’ self-reported mandatory and voluntary overtime hours, as well as their total work hours.

They found that in the states with rules governing mandatory overtime, NLRNs were 59% less likely to work mandatory overtime than their colleagues in unregulated states. (Not all states with overtime rules prohibit mandatory overtime, with some simply limiting total work hours.) Overall, 11.6% of nurses said they worked mandatory overtime in a typical work week, averaging 6.1 hours.

In the states regulating overtime, NLRNs worked an average of 50 fewer minutes per week than their colleagues in states without overtime regulations.

Researchers anticipated that caps on mandatory overtime might lead to increased voluntary overtime, thus defeating the purpose of the restrictions to some degree. But the data demonstrated no relationship between mandatory and voluntary overtime hours. Nevertheless, more than 50% of NLRNs reported working voluntary overtime in a typical workweek.

“While safety is the principal objective of caps on mandatory overtime, the laws probably also have a positive effect on nurse retention,” said study investigator Christine Koyner, RN, PhD, FAAN, professor at the New York University College of Nursing. “Nurses have lives and families outside the workplace just like everybody else, and they probably prefer to have a schedule they can rely on. One way to make their jobs and lives more manageable is to avoid mandatory overtime, which should lead to nurses staying in their jobs, and indeed in the profession longer.”

“The states developed caps on mandatory overtime with safety issues in mind, reasoning that fewer mandatory overtime hours would translate into fewer hours,” said study investigator Sung-Heui Bae, RN, PhD, MPH, assistant professor at the University of Buffalo School of Nursing. “What we learned in this study is that it’s working. The tool is effective. Other states with similar objectives can follow suit and expect similar results.”

RN Work Project

According to RWJF, the RN Work Project (www.rnworkproject.org) is the only multi-state, longitudinal study of new nurses’ turnover rates, intentions and attitudes — including intent, satisfaction, organizational commitment and preferences about work. To date, researchers have learned that more RNs work in hospitals than any other settings early in their careers, with 88.3% working in hospitals six to 18 months after licensure and 78.8% working in hospitals 31 to 54 months after receiving their license.

The study has also revealed that 18.1% of new nurses leave their first employer within a year of starting a job, and 26.2% leave within two years. Nine in 10 of those who leave remain in nursing.

Subsequent studies will determine why nurses stay in or leave their jobs, what influences their first job choice, how the job settings they work in vary over time and whether they move in and out of nursing.

The study appears in an online edition of Nursing Outlook and is available as a PDF at http://www.rnworkproject.org.

Original Article by Nurses.com News .

Catholic Healthcare West Ends Ties with Church as Part of Business Conversion

Catholic Healthcare West shed more than words when the 38-hospital system changed its name to Dignity Health. It dropped its formal connection to the Roman Catholic Church.

San Francisco-based CHW envisioned a system with hospitals coast to coast, beyond its three-state region of Arizona, California and Nevada. To realize that vision, the system on Jan. 23 introduced the new name and the restructuring of its governance to separate from the church. Officials cited enhanced opportunities to expand, saying separating from the church would make the system more attractive to executives from secular or non-Catholic hospitals that are looking for an investor.“What this does is two things: it removes the words ‘Catholic’ and ‘West’ from its name; I think the intention is for broadening the pool of affiliations,” said Brad Spielman, a vice president and senior analyst for Moody’s Investors Service.

The former CHW counts itself as the fifth-largest Catholic system in the country based on revenue, and whether other systems follow suit in an effort to grow remains to be seen. Still, CHW’s conversion poses the latest example of a faith-based system taking drastic actions to position itself for impending healthcare reform and the business demands of the future.

Most observers aren’t surprised, but also wonder if the system’s mission and values have evolved to the point where they were forced to separate. “They view it as removing the ball and chain from themselves,” said Paul Danello, a Washington-based lawyer focused on Catholic canon law.As a growing number of laypeople continue to be involved in leadership, some question whether the Catholic way will remain a feasible way of doing business.

Lawrence Singer, director of the Beazley Institute for Health Law and Policy at Loyola University, a Jesuit school in Chicago, and his colleagues envision a time when compliance with ethical and religious directives could hamstring Catholic hospitals attempting to conduct business in the modern age. “Are we getting to a point where either government policy in the Affordable Care Act or community demand for certain services is such that Catholic healthcare providers won’t effectively be able to compete or serve their market any longer?” Singer said.

Looking to expand eastward

Dignity Health President and CEO Lloyd Dean declined to discuss any pending deals that may have served as motivation for the restructuring, but did say the system is looking to expand east. He also said there’s no “one-size-fits-all” remedy for all Catholic systems. But this one, he said, gives Dignity Health the flexibility to ally with a larger number of organizations.“What I can tell you is, this is the right model for us and it allows us to partner with others whose values who are in sync with our mission, vision and organization,” Dean said.

Dignity Health now has 23 Catholic and 15 non-Catholic hospitals.

Dignity Health officials planted the seeds for a name change in 2010, when CHW released its vision statement for the next decade. Besides making bold goals of expanding, the system listed “dignity” as the first of five core values and described aspirations of developing a “vibrant national healthcare system” by the end of 2020.

“We will grow our healing ministry by expanding access and market share within existing service areas, entering new service areas, and significantly expanding our community-based wellness, ambulatory and nonacute services,” the report, titled Horizon 2020, stated.

Dignity Health officials are quick to point out that they aren’t severing all ties to the church. Dean said the church’s values will remain important at the system’s Catholic and non-Catholic hospitals. The system will continue to prohibit most reproductive services at its existing facilities, regardless of the hospital’s affiliation, allowing only sterilizations at its non-Catholic facilities.“I would say our vision has not changed and neither has our mission as being a voice for the voiceless, serving those in need of quality healthcare,” Dean said.

That’s a statement supported by the Washington, D.C.-based Catholic Health Association. “We do not see it as separating from the church; they worked this corporate structure out in consultation with many bishops,” CHA President and CEO Sister Carol Keehan wrote in an e-mailed statement.

A changing climate is forcing Catholic healthcare organizations to make changes. Earlier this month, the largest Catholic care group in America, 76-hospital Ascension Health, St. Louis, split into two (Jan. 9). The Ascension Health Alliance will manage support services and subsidiaries, while Ascension Health concentrates on hospital operations and healthcare delivery. Last year, Ascension formed a for-profit partnership with private-equity firm Oak Hill Capital Partners that intends to buy struggling Catholic providers and keep them Catholic (See related story).

Blazing a trail?

Sister Judy Carle, Dignity Health’s board vice chair, said CHW leaders discussed splitting the system into non-Catholic and Catholic components, but concluded that would go against the system’s belief in inclusivity. CHW has been the rare group with both non-Catholic and Catholic hospitals. However, Danello predicted that other Catholic systems would follow Dignity Health’s lead, and that three out of the other top five Catholic healthcare organizations would do so in the next two to four years.

Dignity Health has not acquired a hospital since 2007, when it added St. Mary’s Regional Medical Center in Reno, Nev., and the system has been searching for a buyer for that 269-bed hospital.

A published report quoted Dean saying officials from non-Catholic hospitals interested in affiliating with CHW seemed reluctant about joining a Catholic system, worried that they’d have to become Catholic. [Read more...]

CMS Selects Nurses to be “Innovation Advisers”

A New York hospital is testing a new approach to fight obesity. A Boston hospital wants to try a new nursing model. A Montgomery County primary-care clinic plans to expand its pharmacy program that gives one-on-one medication counseling to patients with chronic illnesses.The people who created these programs are among the first 73 “innovation advisers” chosen by federal health officials this month to experiment with ways to provide better health care and reduce costs. Funded with $6 million from the health-care overhaul act, the initiative is one of the first programs of the new Innovation Center at the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, known as CMS.
The advisers are meeting in Baltimore starting Monday for initial training and orientation as part of a year-long commitment, officials said. The health professionals include doctors, nurses, hospital executives and public health and policy experts from institutions in 27 states and the District. The home organizations receive stipends of up to $20,000 to cover some of the costs, such as travel.In the Washington region, the professionals include Rosemary Botchway of the Primary Care Coalition of Montgomery County; Stephanie Bruce, a geriatrician at Washington Hospital Center; and Len Nichols, a health economist at George Mason University.The overall goal of the CMS Innovation Center is to find new ways to improve health and lower costs, said Joe McCannon, a senior adviser. “That’s the North Star for every program we’re introducing,” he said.Some Republicans have questioned the value of investing in experimentation to produce results at a time of limited resources.Under the program, the advisers work on projects in their respective institutions. The goal is for them to become change agents at their home organizations, while also providing CMS officials with new ideas and approaches. CMS will work with them through the year to refine the projects and help “get some traction,” McCannon said. If the projects are successful, the ideas could then be applied more broadly, such as to Medicare and Medicaid.

Officials intend to select a second group of advisers in the spring, for a total of about 200 professionals. [Read more...]