It's not a surprise that there would be supporters and detractors of the proposed meaningful use requirements. With heavyweights making noise, however, you have to sit up straight and listen.
The major rap on the criteria is that they are too prescriptive and unnecessarily complex, making it either applicable for a subset of providers and ignoring progress made by providers in other areas or making it too easy for providers to simply opt out. There are claims that the criteria should be a "destination point" and not a "starting point."
The American Hospital Association and the Medical Group Management Association are among the detractors. They obviously have a big influence on their membership. Deborah C. Peel, MD, founder and chairwoman of Patient Privacy Rights, is also in this camp because the criteria don't address patient control of their medical records. Consumer buy-in is just as critical as provider buy-in.
On the flip side, John Halamka, chairman of the Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP) and Chief Information Officer of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, feels that the criteria reflects a decade of work created by experts in this area. As an expert, you have to respect the work he's done and the knowledge and experience that go with it. He's also an insider, and some may argue that this may color his views.
For H. Stephen Lieber, president and CEO of the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS), the release of the long-awaited criteria means the industry can now move forward with defined requirements. No more speculation. Here it is. There's something to be said about that.
In a message dated December 30th from David Blumenthal, MD, the head of ONC is asking for "continued input to inform the final regulations due in 2010." How will HHS respond to the criticism and will any of the criticism drive change in the proposed criteria? The first clue may be in Blumenthal's next public message.
Patty Enrado blogs daily at EHRWatch.com.
