Health Insights, London
description
Transcript of Health Insights, London
Health Insights, London
CHELSEA FOOTBALL CLUB11 JUNE 2014
Outline• Introduction to HIMSS Analytics EMR Adoption Model
• What are the benefits of using the acute care EMRAM?
• What is next? The Continuity of Care Maturity Model
History of the Acute Care EMRAM• The acute care EMRAM was developed in 2005
• Why the structure?– It is the typical manner by which hospitals rollout enterprise clinical systems
• Are there any usual variations?– Academic Medical Centers often have CPOE live to enable education for the
medical students and residents
• The first Stage 7 validation occurred in Q4 2008– Three years after EMRAM introduction
Why Do We Do It?• Thought leadership
– Quality, Safety, Efficiency improvements
• To inform government policy– Numerous countries and regions use HIMSS Analytics to gather data
for their policy formulation
• To reflect the market– Where is the market heading
• To “drive the market”
• Hospital Data sets:– >5,400 US and >700 Canada
– >8,000 Europe
– >5,000 Asia-Pacific
Data from HIMSS Analytics® Database © 2012 HIMSS Analytics
1.1% 3.1%
13.3%
24.2%
15.7%
27.7%
7.2%
3.2%
5.6%
4.0%
6.1%
12.3%
46.3%
13.7%
6.6%
10.0%
2011 Q2
2014 Q1
N = 5439 N = 5449
Complete EMR, CCDA transactions; Data Analytics to Improve Care
Physician documentation (structured templates), full CDSS, full R-PACS
Closed Loop Medication Administration = Bar Code Enablement
CPOE, or e-Prescribing, Clinical Decision Support (clinical protocols)
Clinical documentation, CDSS (error checking)
CDR, Controlled Medical Vocabulary, CDS, HIE capable
Ancillaries - Lab, Rad, Pharmacy - All Installed
All Three Ancillaries Not Installed
What Are the Benefits of Using the Acute Care EMRAM? SOME QUALITY, SAFETY & EFFICIENCY CORRELATIONS OF STAGE 7 HOSPITALS AND HEALTH SYSTEMS
First, A Look at How US Market Has Changed
The shift to outpatient care has dramatically reduced the number of hospitals and hospital beds – by 2013: <50% of hospitals are >150 bedsNote: Sweden intends to reduce # hospitals by 20% in next decadeNote: Estonia has >50% reduction in # hospitals in five years
1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 20105,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
7,000
7,500
8,000
Number of Hospitals in the U.S.
1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010800,000
900,000
1,000,000
1,100,000
1,200,000
1,300,000
1,400,000
1,500,000
1,600,000
Number of Beds in U.S. Hospitals
-25% -41%
EMR Adoption in the U.S. Market Trended 2006 – 2013
Data from HIMSS AnalyticsTM Database This is how long it takes to make “significant” national progress
Stage 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2014 Q1
Stage 7 0.00% 0.00% 0.30% 0.70% 1.00% 1.20% 1.80% 3.10%
Stage 6 0.10% 0.80% 0.50% 1.60% 3.20% 5.20% 7.30% 13.30%
Stage 5 0.50% 1.40% 2.50% 3.80% 4.50% 8.40% 11.50% 24.20%
Stage 4 3.10% 2.20% 2.50% 7.40% 10.50% 13.20% 14.00% 15.70%
Stage 3 18.70% 25.10% 35.70% 50.90% 49.00% 44.90% 41.70% 27.70%
Stage 2 40.00% 37.20% 31.40% 16.90% 14.60% 12.40% 11.40% 7.20%
Stage 1 17.40% 14.00% 11.50% 7.20% 7.10% 5.70% 4.80% 3.20%
Stage 0 20.40% 19.30% 15.60% 11.50% 10.10% 9.00% 7.50% 5.60%
# of Hospitals n = 4,237n = 5,073 n = 5,166 n = 5,235n = 5,281N=5,337 N=5,310 N= 5,458
Stage 7 Studies on a Macro Scale
Correlations With Stage 7 Status
Source: HIMSS Analytics
Representation of TJC Top Performing Hospitals by # Quality Metrics Excelling In, per EMRAM Stage
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 70.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
1.9% 4.8%10.1% 8.1%
4.2% 6.5% 7.9% 9.7%0.4%1.7%
6.2% 10.0%
6.4%6.4%
12.8%
30.1%
3 or less 4 or more
EMRAM Stage
All
hosp
itals
with
in e
ach
EMR
AM
Sta
ge
2.3%6.5%
16.3%18.1%
10.6%12.9%
20.7%
39.8%
Representation of Hospitals with an "A" Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade by EMRAM Stage
Stage 0 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 70.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
0.0% 5.9%12.8% 14.3% 20.1% 21.8%
30.8%
62.6%
All
hosp
itals
with
in e
ach
EMR
AM
Sta
ge
Tipping Point
Stage 0
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Stage 6
Stage 7
30.035.040.045.050.055.060.065.070.0
38.9
45.5 44.6 45.9 45.942.7
49.0
64.3
EMR Adoption Model Stage
AVG
Clin
ical
Sco
re
Tipping Point
Tipping Point
Value Based Purchasing (VBP) Clinical Scores
What About Cost Efficiency?Some Ground Breaking Research on the Effect of EMR Deployment
What We Found in Researching
• Hospitals that implemented EMR between 1996 and 2009 did NOT generally see a reduction in operating expense, EXCEPT:
– Cost rise immediately during and following implementation and then fall back to previous levels
• However:– Hospitals in locations with IT intensive industry found cost reductions after
three years
– Hospitals in other locations found costs increased
– The initial cost increases was smaller for those in IT intensive locations
The Trillion Dollar Conundrum: Complementarities and Health Information Technology (NBER Working Paper No. 18281)Used by permission – Avi Goldfarb
Used by permission – Avi Goldfarb
Used by permission – Avi Goldfarb
Efficiencies Adjusted for
• Case Mix Index = intensity• Quality scores, publically available• Readmission rate, publically available• Labor input, publically available
– Nursing specifically• etc. ….
Hospital Cost Efficiencies BY EMRAM Stage
Early DRAFTNot for Distribution
Used by permission – Eric Ford
STATUS OF EMR ADOPTION
EMR ADOPTION IN TURKEY, EUROPE AND THE US... based on HIMSS Analytics EMR Adoption Model
1) Only public hospitals, of those 90% with >200 beds2) Excl. Turkey; incl. Austria (42), Belgium (1), Denmark (16), Finland (3), France (17), Germany (383), Ireland (2), Italy (524), Netherlands (68), Norway (3), Poland (83), Portugal (29), Slovenia (2), Spain (220), Sweden (1), Switzerland (8), UK (25) 3) The EMRAM algorithm between Europe and the US differs in some degrees in order to reflect HIT implementation of that particular region
EMR Adoption Model Scores, Means per Country(data from 4/13 – 5/14 (Turkey), 4/12 – 3/14 (Europe), 4/13 – 3/14 (US), no weighting etc. applied)
Source: HIMSS Europe Database (05/2014)
Turkey1 (143)
Europe2 (1,427)
Germany (383)
Netherlands (68)
USA3 (5,449)
EMRAM Score (Means)0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
3.0
2.2
1.8
4.0
4.1
EMR ADOPTION IN TURKEY, EUROPE AND THE US... based on HIMSS Analytics EMR Adoption Model
1) Excl. Turkey; incl. Austria (14), Belgium (1), Denmark (15), Finland (3), France (16), Germany (193), Italy (178), Netherlands (63), Norway (3), Poland (55), Portugal (13), Slovenia (1), Spain (79), Sweden (1), Switzerland (4), UK (20) 2) The EMRAM algorithm between Europe and the US differs in some degrees in order to reflect HIT implementation of that particular region
EMR Adoption Model Scores, Means per Country(data from 4/13 – 5/14 (Turkey), 4/12 – 3/14 (Europe), 4/13 – 3/14 (US), no weighting etc. applied)
Source: HIMSS Europe Database (05/2014)
Turkey (134)
Europe1 (659)
Germany (193)
Netherlands (63)
USA2 (1,310)
EMRAM Score (Means)0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
3.0
2.6
2.3
4.1
5.0
Only public and non-profit
hospitals with >199 beds
So, What is Expected at Stage 7?
Very Good Analytics
Use Analytics to Find Care Issues to AddressUse Analytics to Prove that IT Tools are Enabling Improvements
Find Patients Who Could Benefit From BRCA1 and BRCA2 DNA Testing
• Major University devised rules to search for child bearing age patients who have relatives with estrogen driven CA’s
• Rule fired 1,355 times in October– Generated 22 referrals
• Rule fired 1,478 time in November– Generated ~140 referrals in November
• This tells us several things:– A profound finding– Hard to “sell” DNA testing
1 20
200400600800
1000120014001600
Rules Firing vs. DNA Tests
October & November 2013
Predictive Alerting for Potential Readmissions• 40 key variable are tracked to generate predictive score
• Alerts to physicians with advice on best practice – updated hourly !
Their Model is at 80% Accuracy
Using I.T. Tools to Improve Patient Engagement
Target Your Problems and Cohorts• Rural north central health system attacked CHF readmission rate
– Weight gain due to medication insufficiency or behavior factors, is a strong predictor of readmission
• Gave away blue-tooth enabled weight scales to targeted CHF patients
– Reduced readmissions by -42% over 12 months
Target Your Problems and Cohorts• Teenage obesity & Fit Bits.. Create competitive cohorts with PHR
– -11% reduction in obesity in a year
Mature Organizations Have Created an e-Continuum of CareAnd Have Reduced Costs per Person per Year
Introducing The Continuity of Care Maturity Model
Model Audiences
• Global applicability • Primary Target Audiences:
– Regional & National Health Authorities/ MoH– Integrated Delivery Networks (IDN) – Health Management Organizations (HMOs) /
Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs)– (Private) care chains