Stop fighting the AMA on Meaningful Use

It’s hard to believe that just three years ago or so the phrase “Meaningful Use” meant something entirely different than what we in the medical world now understand it to be (that is, if you truly and completely do understand it!).

As we all know, in March, the CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) released suggested rules for meeting Stage 2 Meaningful Use standards. In July, CMS sent the final rule listing the criteria for hospitals and healthcare providers to the Office of Management and Budget. OMB now needs to approve it and this is the final step in the process.

The American Medical Association has come out fairly strongly against many of the criteria, stating that they are onerous and nearly impossible for physicians to meet.

We in the clinical documentation industry have long been skeptical of the AMA’s position on Meaningful Use; it is often said that the AMA appears self-serving and unfairly critical of anything that is going to make their jobs more difficult and potentially less profitable.

While these are fair observations, they overlook three important points:

First, we in the clinical documentation industry have a vested financial interest in Meaningful Use – there is no point in trying to pretend otherwise. If properly implemented, Meaningful Use really will improve patient care and documentation. But let’s not pretend that doctors express concerns for financial reasons and we express support from a purely humanitarian standpoint – there is a lot of money to be made in Meaningful Use and we should start by admitting that.

Second, it would be naïve to ignore the politics of the situation. The AMA is THE power player in any healthcare debate and we fight them at our peril. As we try to shape and guide government regulations, we would be better served by working closely WITH the AMA, finding common ground where we can join forces and concentrate our efforts as a team.

Last, and most important, if we dismiss the AMA’s objections, we run the risk of putting our own business interests before patient care. Physicians are our warriors on the frontlines of healthcare and we need to pay them heed. Meaningful Use was created to improve patient care and documentation and if all works as planned, it certainly will. But doctors – not transcriptionists or EHR vendors – are the ones who stand next to patients. If they feel some Meaningful Use requirements will disrupt their ability to concentrate on care, we need to listen closely, not dismiss their concerns as “business interests.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • PDF
  • RSS

No related posts.

This entry was posted in Business, Meaningful Use and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Stop fighting the AMA on Meaningful Use

  1. Meaningful Use, much like HIPAA, is meant to solidify the continium of patient care. I believe through ADVOCACY & ALLIANCE with the AMA and physicians, our stronghold will begin to further develop in the world of medical transcription and editing. Physicians realize the value we contribute to patient care. How many times have we “rescued” the dictators / originators from dosage mistakes, or even worse-case scenarios that probably saved their patient’s life? We are the front-line caretakers of healthcare information and align next to patients [as depicted in Regina Holliday's poster for AAMT Week this past May]. We all would do well to support our physicians, and in turn they will continue to appreciate the full value of our skill sets. The pendulum will eventually swing back the other way, once it is fully realized how important the MTs / documentation integrity specialists are to patient care and risk-management proactivity. While personally advocating in Washington, DC with AHDI, I learned firsthand how important our relationship with physicians is. Some of the senators and congressmen I had the privilege of meeting with had very close ties with the AMA and physicians. They were very appreciative of what our industry brings to the table with respect to our future roles in national and international health information exchange.

  2. Joe Weber says:

    Future stages of Meaningful Use will ratchet up the focus on clinical decision support, quality measures, outcome evaluation, and other processes that require codified data. NLP applied to free text is prone to error and requires offline editing. Decision support is impossible without real-time documentation. Unfortunately, transcription and speech-rec editing is time-delayed, and free text is not data. The future looks cloudy if not ominous for the transcription industry. It seems incumbent upon the players in this arena to explore other approaches to clinical documentation. One example is at http://www.valadoc.com. By way of full disclosure, I’m involved with this initiative.

  3. Burgher says:

    thank you for valuable recommendations and merely excellent info

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>