By Mark Brousseau
Every organization, regardless of industry, needs to have a records management policy, and they must have a records manager. Nonetheless, it can be an uphill climb convincing top managers to embrace records management, Kevin Joerling, senior project manager, records management, Perceptive Software, said yesterday at the company’s Inspire 2011 user conference at the Wynn in Las Vegas.
Records and information management is defined as the systematic control of records and information throughout their lifecycle, encompassing creation, use, storage, retention, and disposition. “Retention is where we find many companies are not doing a very good job – knowing how long to keep documents,” Joerling said
And this is an area where companies can waste a lot of money, Joerling said: For every $1 spent on disk storage, $3 to $8 per megabyte is spent on managing that storage, he explained. “In some cases, companies don’t even realize this,” he said.
Joerling said records and information is more important than ever because it: reduces storage costs; organizations information for quick retrieval; facilitates litigation risk avoidance; helps protect information assets; and ensures compliance with recordkeeping laws and regulations. To this last point, Joerling said records management is a key part of an organization’s commitment to risk mitigation.
“Liability lawsuits are often decided on the basis of old records,” Joerling explained. What’s more, the loss of records can have more devastating consequences than the loss of a plant, Joerling said, noting that some companies based in the World Trade Center during 9/11 went out of business because they didn’t have backup records.
So why don’t more top execs embrace records management?
For starters, most top execs don’t understand records management. “Records management is not mainstream yet,” he said. “It’s not taught in too many colleges or universities, so business managers coming out of school don’t understand it.” Many organizations also don’t have a records management professional. “Who’s going to be that champion in your company to go to senior management and say ‘We need to look into this because we could get in trouble by not doing it?’” Joerling asked.
Additionally, records and information management benefits can be difficult to quantify. With tight budgets as a result of the recession, this makes it more difficult to persuade senior management about records and information management.
Joerling offered tips for selling top execs on the need for records management:
1. Describe how records management will solve issues facing your organization.
2. Propose a recommended solution, whether it’s hiring a records manager or records management consultant.
3. Detail what will happen if a records management program is not undertaken.
4. Explain when the records management program will be deployed, and how much money, how much time and how many people will be needed for the program.
5. Keep the discussions at a high level and targeted to c-level core concerns, such as how the program ties into the company’s strategic plan.
“It’s an uphill battle because you’re dealing with something that a lot of executives don’t understand and don’t recognize why it needs to be done,” Joerling admitted. But with the growing importance of records and information management, it’s critical that document professionals convince top execs on the need for a program.
What do you think?
Showing posts with label HPAS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HPAS. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Consolidating patient records
By Mark Brousseau
As they move to electronic medical records (EMRs), one challenge for healthcare providers is how to consolidate electronic access to all of a patient’s documents.
Citizens Memorial Healthcare, which is made up of a hospital, 25 clinics, five long-term care facilities and a cancer center, has licked this problem by using ImageNow from Perceptive Software to tie together documents not captured in its Meditech 5.6 EMR system, including EKGs, radiology reports, outside lab results, wound and surgical photos and registration photos. This integration has allowed Citizens Memorial Healthcare to create a shared medical record across its enterprise.
In its EMR environment, regardless of visit, a patient’s documents are organized under a common number. To access documents related to an account that were not captured at the point-of-service by the EMR, the provider launches ImageNow in the background, allowing documents from either application to be displayed in the EMR system. To speed retrieval, ImageNow indexes documents in several categories; for instance, physicians can view patient diagnostics without having to look through registration documents. Documents also can be retrieved across accounts.
Electronic documents are created at the point-of-registration or via scanning later.
For primary care physicians that don’t have a way to get their EMR records into Citizens Memorial Healthcare’s system, ImageNow provides the ability to “scrape” data off of incoming faxes. As faxes come in to Citizens Memorial Healthcare, they are placed in a workflow queue where an employee triggers the technology.
“Our long-term goal is to have a true interface with Meditech for these documents. But we don’t have that in place now. ImageNow has provided that availability,” Tim Roberts, IS specialist, Citizens Memorial Healthcare, said yesterday during a presentation at Perceptive Software’s Inspire 2011 user conference in Las Vegas.
As they move to electronic medical records (EMRs), one challenge for healthcare providers is how to consolidate electronic access to all of a patient’s documents.
Citizens Memorial Healthcare, which is made up of a hospital, 25 clinics, five long-term care facilities and a cancer center, has licked this problem by using ImageNow from Perceptive Software to tie together documents not captured in its Meditech 5.6 EMR system, including EKGs, radiology reports, outside lab results, wound and surgical photos and registration photos. This integration has allowed Citizens Memorial Healthcare to create a shared medical record across its enterprise.
In its EMR environment, regardless of visit, a patient’s documents are organized under a common number. To access documents related to an account that were not captured at the point-of-service by the EMR, the provider launches ImageNow in the background, allowing documents from either application to be displayed in the EMR system. To speed retrieval, ImageNow indexes documents in several categories; for instance, physicians can view patient diagnostics without having to look through registration documents. Documents also can be retrieved across accounts.
Electronic documents are created at the point-of-registration or via scanning later.
For primary care physicians that don’t have a way to get their EMR records into Citizens Memorial Healthcare’s system, ImageNow provides the ability to “scrape” data off of incoming faxes. As faxes come in to Citizens Memorial Healthcare, they are placed in a workflow queue where an employee triggers the technology.
“Our long-term goal is to have a true interface with Meditech for these documents. But we don’t have that in place now. ImageNow has provided that availability,” Tim Roberts, IS specialist, Citizens Memorial Healthcare, said yesterday during a presentation at Perceptive Software’s Inspire 2011 user conference in Las Vegas.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
A Growing Opportunity for Banks in Healthcare?
Posted by Mark Brousseau
The banking industry has been an integral part of the healthcare world for decades, providing back-end financial administration services to health plans, ranging from processing premium payments and the financial part of the claims payments through medical lockbox services.
For banks, growing opportunities exist in the healthcare market, and revenue potential is apparent, according to Aite Group. To this end, banks are developing new products and services by applying business rules from existing products and services to cater to the healthcare space. With increased consumerism in the healthcare space since the beginning of the consumer-directed healthcare (CDH) movement, banks have been leaning on the core strengths and capabilities they have mastered in the retail environment in order to develop new product strategies, Aite Group says.
“Banks are in the unique position to be able to leverage their existing relationships with various stakeholders, including health plans, clearinghouses, healthcare providers, and healthcare vendors,” says Kunal Pandya, senior analyst with Aite Group. “Although banks’ overall focus in targeting the healthcare market is similar across the board, their approach to targeting specific areas varies widely based on their understanding of the space, relationships in the space, and overall corporate strategy.”
What do you think?
The banking industry has been an integral part of the healthcare world for decades, providing back-end financial administration services to health plans, ranging from processing premium payments and the financial part of the claims payments through medical lockbox services.
For banks, growing opportunities exist in the healthcare market, and revenue potential is apparent, according to Aite Group. To this end, banks are developing new products and services by applying business rules from existing products and services to cater to the healthcare space. With increased consumerism in the healthcare space since the beginning of the consumer-directed healthcare (CDH) movement, banks have been leaning on the core strengths and capabilities they have mastered in the retail environment in order to develop new product strategies, Aite Group says.
“Banks are in the unique position to be able to leverage their existing relationships with various stakeholders, including health plans, clearinghouses, healthcare providers, and healthcare vendors,” says Kunal Pandya, senior analyst with Aite Group. “Although banks’ overall focus in targeting the healthcare market is similar across the board, their approach to targeting specific areas varies widely based on their understanding of the space, relationships in the space, and overall corporate strategy.”
What do you think?
Friday, September 24, 2010
"What are you doing here?"
By Greg Lusch (glusch@ibml.com), ibml (www.ibml.com)
With all of the banks and financial services companies participating in this week's Healthcare Payments Automation Summit (HPAS) in Boston, the healthcare providers and payers in attendance could be excused for momentarily thinking that they were in the wrong place. But they weren't, and neither were their fellow attendees from banking and financial services.
When a single market represents a whopping 17 percent of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) -- as healthcare does -- lots of companies will be looking for ways to cash in. Banks and financial services companies are no exception. And based on my conversations at HPAS, more providers are open to help from banks in automating healthcare payments.
For instance, there was a lot of conversation at HPAS about adapting bank lockbox services to process explanation of benefits (EOBs) and other medical documents. According to the results of a survey released by IAPP-TAWPI at the event, 34 percent of healthcare providers already use a bank lockbox for healthcare payments. Undaunted by the increased security and privacy regulations under the HITECH Act, it is clear that even more banks are pushing forward with lockbox services aimed squarely at hospital and physician practice groups. In fact, the participants on a panel at the event unanimously predicted that the percentage of providers that use a bank lockbox would climb, while a speaker in another session said he expected "slow but steady" growth for both bank and provider-based EOB solutions.
And if HPAS is any indication, banks also are making headway with remote deposit capture (RDC) solutions targeted at the healthcare space, namely, rising patient self-pay and co-insurance/co-payment obligations. According to the IAPP-TAWPI survey released at HPAS, 22 percent of providers currently use RDC. Several vendors of RDC solutions exhibited at the event (Creditron, EPSON and WAUSAU were among them), and a few providers shared case studies of their experiences with the technology as part of the conference agenda (faster funds availability was cited as a key benefit). A common refrain among healthcare providers at HPAS was that lower bank fees have greatly improved the business case for RDC, while banks have done a better job of adapting their solutions to the unique needs of providers.
The role of banks in the healthcare space also was a dominant -- and sometimes heated -- topic during the Healthcare Payments Council meeting that immediately followed HPAS.
The good news for banks looking to crack the healthcare space is that most HPAS attendees believe that while automated payment transactions (claims, remittances and payments) will continue to make gains, paper will be a fact of life in the industry for the foreseeable future.
And that is why banks were at HPAS.
With all of the banks and financial services companies participating in this week's Healthcare Payments Automation Summit (HPAS) in Boston, the healthcare providers and payers in attendance could be excused for momentarily thinking that they were in the wrong place. But they weren't, and neither were their fellow attendees from banking and financial services.
When a single market represents a whopping 17 percent of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) -- as healthcare does -- lots of companies will be looking for ways to cash in. Banks and financial services companies are no exception. And based on my conversations at HPAS, more providers are open to help from banks in automating healthcare payments.
For instance, there was a lot of conversation at HPAS about adapting bank lockbox services to process explanation of benefits (EOBs) and other medical documents. According to the results of a survey released by IAPP-TAWPI at the event, 34 percent of healthcare providers already use a bank lockbox for healthcare payments. Undaunted by the increased security and privacy regulations under the HITECH Act, it is clear that even more banks are pushing forward with lockbox services aimed squarely at hospital and physician practice groups. In fact, the participants on a panel at the event unanimously predicted that the percentage of providers that use a bank lockbox would climb, while a speaker in another session said he expected "slow but steady" growth for both bank and provider-based EOB solutions.
And if HPAS is any indication, banks also are making headway with remote deposit capture (RDC) solutions targeted at the healthcare space, namely, rising patient self-pay and co-insurance/co-payment obligations. According to the IAPP-TAWPI survey released at HPAS, 22 percent of providers currently use RDC. Several vendors of RDC solutions exhibited at the event (Creditron, EPSON and WAUSAU were among them), and a few providers shared case studies of their experiences with the technology as part of the conference agenda (faster funds availability was cited as a key benefit). A common refrain among healthcare providers at HPAS was that lower bank fees have greatly improved the business case for RDC, while banks have done a better job of adapting their solutions to the unique needs of providers.
The role of banks in the healthcare space also was a dominant -- and sometimes heated -- topic during the Healthcare Payments Council meeting that immediately followed HPAS.
The good news for banks looking to crack the healthcare space is that most HPAS attendees believe that while automated payment transactions (claims, remittances and payments) will continue to make gains, paper will be a fact of life in the industry for the foreseeable future.
And that is why banks were at HPAS.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Streamlining Healthcare Payments
By Mark Brousseau
There’s no question that the healthcare payments system is inefficient – with the cost of those inefficiencies pegged at $35 billion a year – but any plans to reengineer the system cannot add new complexities, speakers at the Medical Banking Project Institute said at HIMSS10 on Monday in Atlanta.
“We’re locked in a paper morass. As quickly as possible, we need to liberate data so people can use it at the point of care,” John Casillas, executive director, Medical Banking Project, told attendees.
But Zahoor Elahi, vice president and general manager, Health and Financial Network, FIS Government, Education and Healthcare Solutions had a warning for industry stakeholders.“We’re all aware of the economy we’re in, and the spotlight on healthcare costs. As we move to creating the healthcare financial network of the future, it is important that all of the stakeholders are focused on brining value to it and taking costs out. They can’t be adding more variables and burden,” he said.
What do you think?
There’s no question that the healthcare payments system is inefficient – with the cost of those inefficiencies pegged at $35 billion a year – but any plans to reengineer the system cannot add new complexities, speakers at the Medical Banking Project Institute said at HIMSS10 on Monday in Atlanta.
“We’re locked in a paper morass. As quickly as possible, we need to liberate data so people can use it at the point of care,” John Casillas, executive director, Medical Banking Project, told attendees.
But Zahoor Elahi, vice president and general manager, Health and Financial Network, FIS Government, Education and Healthcare Solutions had a warning for industry stakeholders.“We’re all aware of the economy we’re in, and the spotlight on healthcare costs. As we move to creating the healthcare financial network of the future, it is important that all of the stakeholders are focused on brining value to it and taking costs out. They can’t be adding more variables and burden,” he said.
What do you think?
Sunday, February 28, 2010
The ICD-10 Challenge
By Mark Brousseau
“ICD-10 is probably one of the biggest changes to occur in health IT in 30 years,” Dr. Joe Nichols, Edifecs medical director, told attendees at the Medical Banking Project Boot Camp this afternoon at HIMSS10 in Atlanta. “It is massive.”
ICD codes, which were developed for coding institutionally related procedures, are maintained by the World Health Organization (WHO). Most developed countries other than the United States use ICD-10, Nichols noted. The United States still uses ICD-9 codes. The international version of ICD-10 contains approximately 12,400 diagnostic codes. WHO approved the U.S. version of ICD-10, which contains approximately 69,000 codes.
As of October 1, 2013, all claims in the United States must use ICD-10.
Why is this so important? Because ICD-10 is a cornerstone of healthcare information, Nichols said. “It is the standard for defining the health state of the patient, and the institutional procedures that patients may receive to maintain or improve their health state,” he explained. “This is a big change in the coding system.” What was 14,300 codes under ICD-9 will rise to 69,000 codes under ICD-10, Nichols noted, with the number of procedure codes increasing from 3,800 to 72,000 under ICD-10.
With ICD codes pervasive throughout most health systems, and many business functions impacted by the codes, it is important that healthcare organizations have plan for supporting ICD-10 codes.
“ICD-10 codes are used for a lot of things,” Nichols said. As examples, he mentioned: actuarial and financial risk; adjudication; outcomes; population health analysis; benefits design; fraud, waste and abuse analysis; quality and efficiency assessment; medical policies and clinical guidelines; payment rules; clinical history; utilization; and regulatory reporting. “We based a lot of our national policies on this,” Nichols said. “The implications are far-reaching. Imperfect mapping from ICD-9 to ICD-10 will affect processing and analytics in a way that impacts revenue, costs, risk and relationships.”
So how do you deal with this?
“If you haven’t started now, you’re going to be behind the gun,” Nichols said. But organizations need to look at their short-term goals with a long-term vision, to determine what solutions they need today, and whether those solutions will meet future needs. Organizations also need to be aware of ICD-10’s touch points with other initiatives, and the potential downstream impacts of the change. And they should collaborate with business and trading partners as they develop their ICD-10 plans. Finally, organizations should use ICD-10 to try to position themselves for competitive advantage. “There are huge competitive advantages to using ICD-10 better than your competitors,” Nichols explained.
“ICD-10 is probably one of the biggest changes to occur in health IT in 30 years,” Dr. Joe Nichols, Edifecs medical director, told attendees at the Medical Banking Project Boot Camp this afternoon at HIMSS10 in Atlanta. “It is massive.”
ICD codes, which were developed for coding institutionally related procedures, are maintained by the World Health Organization (WHO). Most developed countries other than the United States use ICD-10, Nichols noted. The United States still uses ICD-9 codes. The international version of ICD-10 contains approximately 12,400 diagnostic codes. WHO approved the U.S. version of ICD-10, which contains approximately 69,000 codes.
As of October 1, 2013, all claims in the United States must use ICD-10.
Why is this so important? Because ICD-10 is a cornerstone of healthcare information, Nichols said. “It is the standard for defining the health state of the patient, and the institutional procedures that patients may receive to maintain or improve their health state,” he explained. “This is a big change in the coding system.” What was 14,300 codes under ICD-9 will rise to 69,000 codes under ICD-10, Nichols noted, with the number of procedure codes increasing from 3,800 to 72,000 under ICD-10.
With ICD codes pervasive throughout most health systems, and many business functions impacted by the codes, it is important that healthcare organizations have plan for supporting ICD-10 codes.
“ICD-10 codes are used for a lot of things,” Nichols said. As examples, he mentioned: actuarial and financial risk; adjudication; outcomes; population health analysis; benefits design; fraud, waste and abuse analysis; quality and efficiency assessment; medical policies and clinical guidelines; payment rules; clinical history; utilization; and regulatory reporting. “We based a lot of our national policies on this,” Nichols said. “The implications are far-reaching. Imperfect mapping from ICD-9 to ICD-10 will affect processing and analytics in a way that impacts revenue, costs, risk and relationships.”
So how do you deal with this?
“If you haven’t started now, you’re going to be behind the gun,” Nichols said. But organizations need to look at their short-term goals with a long-term vision, to determine what solutions they need today, and whether those solutions will meet future needs. Organizations also need to be aware of ICD-10’s touch points with other initiatives, and the potential downstream impacts of the change. And they should collaborate with business and trading partners as they develop their ICD-10 plans. Finally, organizations should use ICD-10 to try to position themselves for competitive advantage. “There are huge competitive advantages to using ICD-10 better than your competitors,” Nichols explained.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
California Fast-Tracks Healthcare EDI
Posted by Mark Brousseau
California regulations for electronic workers' compensation billing slated for publication before end of this year are likely to see fast-tracked implementation, according to Jopari Solutions, a supplier of medical EDI connectivity and transmission for the property and casualty industry.
EBilling is a key initiative the California Insurance Commissioner and Division of Workers' Compensation officials say is essential, along with other benchmark recommendations, to streamline the state's workers' compensation system, rein in medical costs and keep employer costs down. This past week, the Commissioner rejected any recommended increase in California's workers' compensation pure premium rate.
California's eBill regulations will specify an 18-month phase-in period for workers' compensation payers to acquire the ability to process eBill transactions, after regulations get signed into law. n addition, California is adopting uniform electronic claim and remittance standards similar to those mandated in Texas and Minnesota, which are supported by national standards organizations.
Facilitating rapid transition by carriers is the fact that national and regional health care provider networks are eager to expand electronic bill submissions with payers into their California markets. A large percentage of local health care practices today also exchange electronic health insurance claims, payments and remittance, or have medical transaction ready EDI billing software. Compressed timely payment deadline for clean electronic bills under California eBill rules - fifteen days as opposed to forty-five days for uncontested paper bills - is another factor expected to put early pressure on carriers by their medical services trading partners.
As Jopari CEO JR "Steve" Stevens and veteran industry observer Peter Rousmaniere point out in a new whitepaper, The E-billing Transformation, the community of beneficiaries from the switch to electronic transmission of bills and supporting documentation, or attachments, goes beyond state agencies pushing for administrative simplification, better data and more stakeholder accountability. Stevens and Rousmaniere indicate, "Conventional transmission methods, heavily dependent on mail, faxing and scanning, impose delays and error rates which leading medical bill review firms estimate as upwards of 20 percent or more. Electronic submission largely sweeps away these defects." They explain that, "Claims payers should therefore approach e-billing not simply as a way of shaving the burdens of managing paper flow -- they should use e-billing to sweep away obstacles to improving the management of medical care."
Stevens and Rousmaniere conclude that payers undertaking early compliance initiatives will strengthen themselves competitively, both in California and nationally. Carriers slow to adopt electronic transmission methods, however, will remain burdened by antiquated workflow; unable to reduce delays and errors in the handling of medical information; and be handicapped in their attempts to control spiraling medical costs, they say.
What do you think?
California regulations for electronic workers' compensation billing slated for publication before end of this year are likely to see fast-tracked implementation, according to Jopari Solutions, a supplier of medical EDI connectivity and transmission for the property and casualty industry.
EBilling is a key initiative the California Insurance Commissioner and Division of Workers' Compensation officials say is essential, along with other benchmark recommendations, to streamline the state's workers' compensation system, rein in medical costs and keep employer costs down. This past week, the Commissioner rejected any recommended increase in California's workers' compensation pure premium rate.
California's eBill regulations will specify an 18-month phase-in period for workers' compensation payers to acquire the ability to process eBill transactions, after regulations get signed into law. n addition, California is adopting uniform electronic claim and remittance standards similar to those mandated in Texas and Minnesota, which are supported by national standards organizations.
Facilitating rapid transition by carriers is the fact that national and regional health care provider networks are eager to expand electronic bill submissions with payers into their California markets. A large percentage of local health care practices today also exchange electronic health insurance claims, payments and remittance, or have medical transaction ready EDI billing software. Compressed timely payment deadline for clean electronic bills under California eBill rules - fifteen days as opposed to forty-five days for uncontested paper bills - is another factor expected to put early pressure on carriers by their medical services trading partners.
As Jopari CEO JR "Steve" Stevens and veteran industry observer Peter Rousmaniere point out in a new whitepaper, The E-billing Transformation, the community of beneficiaries from the switch to electronic transmission of bills and supporting documentation, or attachments, goes beyond state agencies pushing for administrative simplification, better data and more stakeholder accountability. Stevens and Rousmaniere indicate, "Conventional transmission methods, heavily dependent on mail, faxing and scanning, impose delays and error rates which leading medical bill review firms estimate as upwards of 20 percent or more. Electronic submission largely sweeps away these defects." They explain that, "Claims payers should therefore approach e-billing not simply as a way of shaving the burdens of managing paper flow -- they should use e-billing to sweep away obstacles to improving the management of medical care."
Stevens and Rousmaniere conclude that payers undertaking early compliance initiatives will strengthen themselves competitively, both in California and nationally. Carriers slow to adopt electronic transmission methods, however, will remain burdened by antiquated workflow; unable to reduce delays and errors in the handling of medical information; and be handicapped in their attempts to control spiraling medical costs, they say.
What do you think?
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Consumers Want Electronic Health Information
Posted by Mark Brousseau
Deloitte’s 2009 Survey of Healthcare Consumers includes some interesting data regarding consumer interest in electronic health records:
… 9 percent of respondents have a computerized personal health record (PHR) compared to 8 percent in 2008
… 57 percent want a secure Internet site that would enable them to access their medical records and pay medical bills, among other things
… 42 percent want access to an online personal health record connected to their doctor’s office
… privacy and security of health information is an issue: 38 percent are very concerned versus 24 percent who are not at all concerned
… 60 percent believe that the government should set standards for how medical information is collected, stored, exchanged and protected, while other view this as a role for health plans (21 percent) and employers (5 percent); 14 percent say no entity should set standards
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Deloitte’s 2009 Survey of Healthcare Consumers includes some interesting data regarding consumer interest in electronic health records:
… 9 percent of respondents have a computerized personal health record (PHR) compared to 8 percent in 2008
… 57 percent want a secure Internet site that would enable them to access their medical records and pay medical bills, among other things
… 42 percent want access to an online personal health record connected to their doctor’s office
… privacy and security of health information is an issue: 38 percent are very concerned versus 24 percent who are not at all concerned
… 60 percent believe that the government should set standards for how medical information is collected, stored, exchanged and protected, while other view this as a role for health plans (21 percent) and employers (5 percent); 14 percent say no entity should set standards
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
