Lorraine Fernandes, RHIA, RHIT

We Yanks might learn a thing or two about making decisive, countrywide health care decisions from our Canadian neighbors

Lorraine Fernandes, RHIA, RHIT

We in the United States are facing a crisis with the inequality and high cost of our health care services. We have a fragmented health care delivery system that functions with discrete silos of data.

Creating a cohesive health care system is exactly what we need to meet the common objective of delivering high-quality, cost-effective, and timely patient care. Luckily, we have a model to follow directly to our north: Canada.

There, the 14 federal, provincial, and territorial deputy ministers of health — as well as regional health care authorities and other health care organizations and information technology vendors and suppliers — are working together to provide 50 percent of Canadians with access to a secure electronic health record (EHR) by 2010.

How does a country with more than 33 million people come to an agreement and move forward with a countrywide health care IT system?

Easy: In Canada, the health care IT infrastructure functions like a business unit. To move forward with EHR adoption, this representative group did research, made a decision, secured funding, and began implementation.

Churning costs money

Here in the United States we don’t make decisions nearly this quickly. We’ve been churning over patient identification, for example, for more than a decade. Churning costs money; churning costs development time and effectiveness; ultimately, churning costs lives. Let’s take a lesson from our northern neighbors and get the job done.

Canada Health Infoway, an independent not-for-profit organization that invests with public partners across Canada to implement and reuse compatible health information systems architecture, is spearheading the initiative.

One of the first steps in implementing this nationwide project, and one of the most pivotal aspects of its success, was to create a common blueprint — an electronic health record infostructure.

This blueprint includes:

  • Client registry systems, similar to enterprise master-person indexes and record locator services that commonly support regional health information organizations (RHIOs) in the United States. A master person index is a software application that identifies persons in an integrated delivery network across different registration, scheduling, financial, and clinical systems.
  • A longitudinal record service, to coordinate data across multiple domains and registries
  • Standardized common services and communication services to sustain privacy, security, and overall interoperability
  • Standardized information and message structures to support ease of implementation and interoperability and data sharing within and across provinces.

In this model, each infostructure, which may include client or provider registries, data warehouses, and diagnostic and clinical applications, operate with other infostructures in a peer-to-peer manner through the Health Information Access Layer (HIAL), which is where end users begin their journey for data sharing.

Watch and learn

Let’s learn from Canada’s success and follow a business-model approach.

First, of course, let’s have a blueprint. Second, let’s invest wisely and strategically — and measure results to monitor that investment. The Canadian government invested $1.6 billion in the initiative. Government entities knew they needed value from their investment, so they funded a few targeted areas rather than spreading their investment across a range of initiatives.

Second, we must demand results. In Canada, Infoway must report status and success metrics each year. Again, this mirrors the way a business unit would operate.

Third, there can be no churning. Period. We need to make decisions and start to move.

Ron G. Parker, director of architecture in the solution architecture group at Infoway, adds this advice: “It is important to invest in a structured collaboration model that ensures all key stakeholder communities are represented in the process of standardization.”

He explains that standardization of business processes in any industry requires a three-level simultaneous “sell.” The first sell is to the executive decision makers/sponsors, the second to the people with industry expertise who “live” the problem today, and the third to the people that implement the business processes directly.

“Only if everybody in this stack knows the other groups are good to go can you have success,” Parker said.

O Canada!

I love Canada. It is just not convenient for me to move there. In fact, my personal goal is to retire in Montana. My hope is that we will have a nationwide health care IT system in place by that time. Needless to say, the clock is ticking. Can’t we follow someone else’s lead?

Lorraine Fernandes is a vice president of Initiate Systems and is a recognized leader in the health care IT industry. She frequently speaks at domestic and international industry conferences on topics such as RHIOs, health data exchange, patient identification, and best practices for master person index (MPI) cleanup. She serves on committees and workgroups for HIMSS, AHIMA, and Health Initiatives. She can be reached at lfernandes@initiatesystems.com.

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.