|
I was reading an article in Computerworld about how federal dollars being pumped into grant programs aimed at drawing students to pursue IT careers in the healthcare industry may generate up to 50,000 new jobs over the next five years, according to a top federal health official who spoke at a healthcare IT conference in Boston last week.
Speaking at the Health Information Technology Conference last week, Dr. David Blumenthal, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, said a portion of $2 billion in discretionary funds under the Office of the National Coordinator is being earmarked towards education and training for electronic medical records (EMR) implementations. A sizeable chunk of the training will be used for people to staff some 60 regional extension centers that are being established to help rural hospitals and physician practices with 10 or fewer doctors to rollout EMR systems and supporting technologies.
In early 2009, the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act established $19 billion for healthcare information technology spending. Much of this spending is tied to incentives for hospitals, clinics and physician groups to adopt electronic medical records systems.
I’m fascinated by the whole debate around the adoption of electronic medical records systems by hospitals, clinics and physician groups. Proponents claim that EMR systems will reduce wasteful and costly re-testing of patients by making records accessible to different types of healthcare practitioners. More importantly, EMR advocates maintain that automating processes related to prescriptions and diagnoses will reduce error rates and accidental or avoidable deaths.
But EMR systems are both complex and controversial. In January, Senator Charles E. Grassley (R-IA) sent a letter to 31 of the nation’s largest hospitals asking them to share their experiences in implementing EMR systems. He states in the letter that he was prompted to do this “based on concerns brought to his attention in recent months, including administrative complications, formatting and usability issues, errors and interoperability.” Sen. Grassley says healthcare providers have informed him that some of the software in use is producing incorrect medication dosages because it miscalculated body weights by interchanging kilograms and pounds.
Many physicians say they’re reluctant to implement EMR systems because the time and resources needed to install the software and train people to use it would be too disruptive to their already overloaded practices. Two surveys by The New England Journal of Medicine last year found that just 1.5 percent of hospitals and 4 percent of doctor practices have implemented comprehensive EMR systems.
Private practice physicians are eligible to receive up to $44,000 for rolling out EMRs so long as they’re able to demonstrate “meaningful use” of the technology. Meanwhile, hospitals could be in line to receive millions of dollars in federal reimbursements.
Here’s the catch: physicians and hospitals that don't roll out EMR systems or prove that they are making "meaningful use" of them by 2015 face reduced Medicare reimbursement penalties.
Personally I think there are enough financial incentives and penalties built into the current model to help drive widespread adoption over the next five years. But whether the thousands of small physician groups and struggling hospitals get on board with this is another matter.
I hope those 50,000 IT jobs do materialize. But with EMR adoption rates as slow as they’ve been for so long, I’m not holding my breath.
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. |
