I’m in China this week, meeting with government, academia, and industry leaders in Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Beijing, Shanghai, and Suzhou. The twelve hour time difference means that I can work a day in China, followed by a day in Boston. For the next 7 days, I’ll truly be living on both sides of the planet. I recently delivered this policy update about the key developments in healthcare IT policy and sentiment over the past 90 days. I’ve not written a specific summary of the recently released Quality Patient Program proposed rule which provides the detailed regulatory guidance for implementation of MACRA/MIPS, but here’s the excellent 26 page synopsis created by CMS which provides an overview of the 1058 page rule...
OpenID
See the following -
An Alternative Proposal for Certification
By John D. Halamka, MD | July 6, 2016
Some have suggested that my comments over the past few months about the Meaningful Use program, MACRA/MIPS, and Certification imply that we should just give up - throw out the baby with the bath water. That’s not what I’ve written.
Here’s a clarification. I believe MACRA/MIPS is the right trajectory - create a set of desirable policy outcomes, then enable clinicians to choose technology, quality measures, and process improvements that are relevant to their practice...
- Login to post comments
Halamka's Reflections on US Health IT Policy Trajectory
By John D. Halamka, MD | July 6, 2017
- Login to post comments
Navigation Between Heavy-weight and Light-weight Standardization (Part 2)
Andy Oram | EMR & HIPPA | August 26, 2016
The previous section of this article laid out the context for HL7 FHIR standard and the Argonaut project; now we can look at the current status.Tripathi portrays the Argonaut process as radically different from HL7 norms. HL7 hasestablished its leading role in health standards by following the rules of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in the US, and similar bodies set up in other countries where HL7 operates. These come from the pre-Internet era and emphasize ponderous, procedure-laden formalities. Meetings must be held, drafts circulated, comments explicitly reconciled, ballots taken. Historically this has ensured that large industries play fair and hear through all objections, but the process is slow and frustrates smaller actors who may have good ideas but lack the resources to participate.
- Login to post comments
Notes on the April Meeting of the HIT Standards Committee
By John D. Halamka, MD | April 25, 2014
The April Standards Committee began with a tribute to Jon Perlin, who is leaving his chair role of the HIT Standards Committee so that he can focus on his chair role at the American Hospital Association. Jacob Reider, Deputy National Coordinator will serve as the Standards committee chair. I will continue as vice-chair. Read More »
- Login to post comments
What the IoT can learn from the health care industry
By Andy Oram | March 19, 2015
After a short period of excitement and rosy prospects in the movement we’ve come to call the Internet of Things (IoT), designers are coming to realize that it will survive or implode around the twin issues of security and user control: a few electrical failures could scare people away for decades, while a nagging sense that someone is exploiting our data without our consent could sour our enthusiasm. Early indicators already point to a heightened level of scrutiny — Senator Ed Markey’s office, for example, recently put the automobile industry under the microscope for computer and network security. Read More »
- Login to post comments
Copyright ©2011-2020 Open Health Marketplace, LLC. All Rights Reserved.