Introduction
Meaningful use is a term used to define minimum U.S. government standards for electronic health records (EHR). The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health HITECH Act of 2009 encouraged the adoption of these guidelines (Yuan et al., 2021). Meaningful use outlines how clinical patient data should be exchanged between healthcare providers, patients, and insurers. The primary intent of meaningful use was to improve public and clinical healthcare collaboration, standardize data exchanges, improve patient-centric preventive care, and support robust development. The guidelines provided by the meaningful use guidelines help the organization to improve safety, quality, efficiency, and a reduction in healthcare concerns. The guidelines engage the family and the patient and improve care coordination. Concepts of meaningful use are crucial for the organization because they are dedicated to enhancing public and population health, and most importantly, they encompass the security and protection of personal health information.
Meaningful Use Guidelines Stages
The first stage of meaningful use was launched in 2011 and involves health organizations adopting an EHS for the significance of entering patients’ data and sharing information within the system (Cohen et al., 2018). In the second stage, the guidelines introduced new measures and objectives requiring providers to extend the electronic health record system capabilities to accommodate a large patient population. The second stage of meaningful use was adopted in 2014 (Cohen et al., 2018). The third stage of meaningful use aims to simplify the use of electronic health systems, which focuses on improving and interoperability of patient outcomes. Stage 3 of meaningful use involves simplifying the use of EHR systems, and successful compliance with the guidelines results in incentives for the healthcare organization.
Vila Health’s Independence Medical Center
Vila Health’s Independence Medical Center is involved in the healthcare and treatment of all kinds of patients. The medical center staff includes nursing, pharmacy, laboratory, medical records, coding and billing, and radiology. The current electronic health records system used in Villa Health in Villa Health’s medical Centre is called Opus, which was implemented in the organization in 2008 (Vila Health: Analysis of EHR system, n.d.). The organization usually operates just as any other healthcare Centre; however, ten years after Opus was implemented, it was found that it was not working as efficiently or effectively as desired.
Current State of Compliance in the Medical Center
The current state of the HIS at the medical center can be described as incomplete, unreliable, and costly. Patient records and documentation are not available for access by the employees. The EHR is not correctly integrated with the other systems. The employees are having a hard time using the procedure. They are compelled to use shortcuts in emergencies and other departments, such as not getting the correct information. The EHR is not supporting workflow in the organization, and complete reports are not present in their system, resulting in issues with coding, billing, and denial of claims (Vila Health: Analysis of EHR system, n.d.). Additionally, the patient’s problem and assessments and problem list are not updated in the system when admitted into the ICU, which can result in problems for the doctor’s staff and other medical professionals. The star field is that the information on the electronic health records is inaccurate and untrustworthy.
When the personnel in the organization give their views regarding the EHR, the standpoint of the chief medical officer indicates that the organization is facing troubles with integration. The officer is concerned that the system is outdated and unable to communicate with other systems efficiently. He desires to look for a more updated system version (Vila Health: Analysis of EHR system, n.d.). The chief of nursing and the nursing staff feel a need for maintenance scheduling. They state that it is needed for staffing coverage and that access to discharge instructions is inefficient.
The pharmacy manager apprehends that there is an integration challenge in the system. The system cannot track medication, check if drugs are available, or issue a prescription order. From the standpoint of the chief of diagnostics, there is a need for access to scheduled tests and regular equipment maintenance. The chief of diagnostics suggests that the tracking system needs to be compliant with all departments and claims that access to results has been problematic (Vila Health: Analysis of EHR system, n.d.). Those who need access are first forced to import them directly into patients’ records.
How EHR Improves Quality of Care
Electronic health records have been significant in increasing patient satisfaction by helping in the communication of patients and assisting the organization in offering better patient care. The EHR reduces time wasted on office appointments and improves appointment scheduling through integrated systems. The EHR decreases necessary immunizations and tests, which can be unsafe and costly to the patient (Robinson & Kersey, 2018). HR improves communication with a patient and reduces turnaround time in response to inquiries and billings. Accessing clinical guidelines and protocols is made easier so that the organization provides the patients with the most efficient care. The EHR encourages patients to take ownership and manage their healthcare using clinical summaries and educational resources. The system serves as an alert to the patient’s safety problem in analyzing the patient’s records (Adler-Milstein et al., 2018). It improves patient outcomes and diagnostics, and the management of the patients is easier through e-prescribing, reducing patient waiting time.
Recommendations
The analysis of the EHRs for the healthcare organization was done to reveal what enhancements can be made to the HIM system. The meaningful use of the EHR is to make sure that the certified technology is linked in a manner that improves quality care. Most departments experience challenges with how information is retrieved and interoperability. The medical Centre would function more effectively if the system were integrated to reduce missing information and other mishaps. Departments such as lab, imaging, audiology, pharmacy, and neurology need to be able to schedule tests. The department should have a way to communicate results with providers and doctors or other medical professionals who need them. The way the EHR system is being used is a challenge. Most staff found shortcuts when dealing with emergencies that hindered some other departments, like billing.
To improve the medical Centre, the entire staff must be provided with training on Opus and other systems. Training will be necessary for all staff to ensure the hospital staff is equipped with the required skills. Team leaders should collaborate with the supervisor to implement a plan for more diversity and change in its operations. Incentives will be provided after the matrix and goals are made to motivate their staff to achieve the target mission. The organization should consider getting an updated electronic health records system version to achieve the best results (HealthIT.gov. (n.d.). The medical Centre should additionally take advantage of available workshops for practical learning of any updates and current valuable technology in the healthcare industry.
Best Practices for Compliance
The long-term compliance will ensure that the medical center is not faced with such challenges now and in the future. The organization should monitor meaningful use guidelines at all times and ensure it has up-to-date information on compliance requirements (Cohen et al., 2018). The organization should document changes in procedures and policies and ensure that the documents are regularly updated online to enforce the necessity of change in the organization. The medical Centre should always make the best choices when choosing the EHR systems, even in future practices. Employees must complete coding and documentation to ensure that the system runs efficiently. The staff should, at all times, double-check documentation and not count on the template. The facility should tailor EHR to suit the workflows, eliminate duplication, and conduct continuous evaluations to ensure there are no issues or non-adherence to set standards (Cohen et al., 2018). The organization should check for security breaches and perform system maintenance regularly.
Conclusion
In conclusion, an efficient EHR improves the ability to diagnose diseases and reduce and prevent medical errors. Meaningful use guidelines provide standards for EHR use and outline data transfer. Vila Health’s Independence Medical Center implemented the Opus system, but the organization has noticed inefficiency in its work. The staff has confirmed that the system does not comply with the meaningful use guidelines. Recommendations for the organizations and the best practices to improve compliance are provided.
References
Adler-Milstein, J., Everson, J., & Lee, S.-Y. D. (2014). Sequencing of EHR adoption among US hospitals and the impact of meaningful use. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 21(6), 984–991. Web.
Cohen, D. J., Dorr, D. A., Knierim, K., DuBard, C. A., Hemler, J. R., Hall, J. D., & Balasubramanian, B. A. (2018). Primary care practices’ abilities and challenges in using electronic health record data for quality improvement. Health Affairs, 37(4), 635-643. Web.
HealthIT.gov. (n.d.). Meaningful use and MACRA. Web.
Robinson, K. E., & Kersey, J. A. (2018). Novel electronic health record (EHR) education intervention in large healthcare organization improves quality, efficiency, time, and impact on burnout. Medicine, 97(38). Web.
Vila Health:Analysis of EHR system. (n.d.). Web.
Yuan, B., Li, J., & Wu, P. (2021). The effectiveness of electronic health record promotion for healthcare providers in the United States since the health information technology for economic and clinical Health Act: An empirical investigation. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 36(2), 334-352. Web.
