Meaningful Use FAQ

As reported on EMR and HIPAA, CMS has made comments on the Meaningful Use Interim Final Rule public, providing an additive level of transparency and CMIO promptly provided a summary of the EHR comments. In light of the transparency CMS/HHC/ONC yields in regards to the Meaningful Use Interim Final Rule, we encourage members of the healthcare IT community to take full advantage of the comment period, which ends in less than a month from now. To encourage ongoing dialogue, we have published a Meaningful Use FAQ in which we anticipate aggregating questions that persist in the community and also encourage active participation. For instance, in a previous post, I pondered how meaningful use would be communicated.

Other items to note in regards to lingering questions surrounding Meaningful Use and ARRA as a whole:

  • Dr. John Halamka also addressed the public comments on the Interim final rule on his blog post.
  • Many questions persist surrounding interoperability standards, and as John over at EMR and EHR addressed on his blog post, the Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP) was recently extended to be operational until April 30th only. How will this impact communication of meaningful use from organization to the government?
  • We recently updated our meaningful use matrix to include which functionality supporting MU measures are delivered in the Allscripts Enterprise EHR (AE-EHR). John at EMR and HIPAA is also collecting a number of the various matrixes that people have put together around the EMR meaningful use criteria

If your organization is looking for assistance in exhibiting meaningful use, please contact and visit our website for more information regarding our technical and professional service offerings.

Facebook Twitter Email

1 comment

Add yours
  1. 1

    Today medical practitioners are looking to avail of this federal incentive by trying to comply with the definition of meaningful use but at the same time EHR providers are looking at their own set of profits.
    This misunderstanding is mostly I believe as a result of wrong interpretation of the federal guidelines. The EHR providers need to look at these guidelines from the prospective of the practitioners who deal with different specialties.
    Each specialty EHR has its own set of challenges or requirements which I believe is overlooked by im most EHR vendors in a effort to merely follows federal guidelines. This is resulting in low usability to the practitioners, thus less ROI, finally redundancy of the EHR solution in place.
    I think ROI is very important factor that should be duly considered when look achieve a ‘meaning use’ out of a EHR solution. Though one may get vendors providing ‘meaning use’ at a lower cost, their ROI / savings through the use of their EHR might be pretty low when compared to costlier initial investment. Found a pretty useful ROI tool that is pretty customizable and easy to use. It also accounts for the different specialty EHR’s too.
    There are other good references on the topics of:

    Usability/meaningful use

    Certification criteria for EHR

+ Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.