Free Hospital EMR and EHR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to Hospital EMR and EHR for FREE!

UCHealth Adds Claims Data To Population Health Dataset

Posted on April 24, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

A Colorado-based health system is implementing a new big data strategy which incorporates not only data from clinics, hospitals and pharmacies, but also a broad base of payer claim data.

UCHealth, which is based in Aurora, includes a network of seven hospitals and more than 100 clinics, caring collectively for more than 1.2 million unique patients in 2016. Its facilities include the University of Colorado Hospital, the principal teaching hospital for the University of Colorado School of Medicine.

Leaders at UCHealth are working to improve their population health efforts by integrating data from seven state insurers, including Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Cigna, Colorado Access, Colorado Choice Health Plans, Colorado Medicaid, Rocky Mountain Health Plans and United Healthcare.

The health system already has an Epic EMR in place across the system which, as readers might expect, offers a comprehensive view of all patient treatment taking place at the system’s clinics and hospitals.

That being said, the Epic database suffers from the same limitations as any other locally-based EMR. As UCHealth notes, its existing EMR data doesn’t track whether a patient changes insurers, ages into Medicare, changes doctors or moves out of the region.

To close the gaps in its EMR data, UCHealth is using technology from software vendor Stratus, which offers a healthcare data intelligence application. According to the vendor, UCHealth will use Stratus technology to support its accountable care organizations as well as its provider clinical integration strategy.

While health system execs expect to benefit from integrating payer claims data, the effort doesn’t satisfy every item on their wish list. One major challenge they’re facing is that while Epic data is available to all the instant it’s added, the payer data is not. In fact, it can take as much as 90 days before the payer data is available to UCHealth.

That being said, UCHealth’s leaders expect to be able to do a great deal with the new dataset. For example, by using Stratus, physicians may be able to figure out why a patient is visiting emergency departments more than might be expected.

Rather than guessing, the physicians will be able to request the diagnoses associated with those visits. If the doctor concludes that their conditions can be treated in one of the system’s primary care clinics, he or she can reach out to these patients and explain how clinic-based care can keep them in better health.

And of course, the health system will conduct other increasingly standard population health efforts, including spotting health trends across their community and better understanding each patient’s medical needs.

Over the next several months, 36 of UCHealth’s primary care clinics will begin using the Stratus tool. While the system hasn’t announced a formal pilot test of how Stratus works out in a production setting, rolling this technology out to just 36 doctors is clearly a modest start. But if it works, look for other health systems to scoop up claims data too!

Diving Into Population Health

Posted on April 21, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Population Health is a nebulous term that seems to be applied a lot of different directions. To get a better understanding of what’s happening with Population Health, Healthcare Scene sat down with Arthur Kapoor, President and CEO of HealthEC. HealthEC has been working in healthcare and the population health space for more than 24 years, so they have an interesting perspective on how that space has evolved over the years and where we are today.

You can watch the full video embedded below, or skip to any of the following population health topics we discussed with Arthur:

Utilizing data to understand and better serve populations is only going to become more important in healthcare. A big thanks to Arthur for sharing his insights with us.

If you liked this video, be sure to subscribe to Healthcare Scene on YouTube and watch other Healthcare Scene interviews.

The Disconnect Between Patient Experience and Records Requests – HIM Scene

Posted on April 19, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the HIM Series of blog posts. If you’d like to receive future HIM posts in your inbox, you can subscribe to future HIM Scene posts here.

This week I met with one of the digital marketing team at a children’s hospital. We had a great conversation about the hospital website and the way the hospital’s website represented the organization to the patient. Plus, we talked about how patients choose to interact with the hospital through their website. There are a wide variety of patient requests through the website, but one of those requests was a request for their patient record.

It wasn’t really a surprise that this digital marketer didn’t really know the details of what’s required for a patient to make an appropriate medical record request from his hospital. In his defense, he didn’t usually answer the questions, but just created the website that collected the questions. However, it was quite clear that the workflow for any medical records request was to send it to their HIM department and let them figure it out.

Most organization then have their HIM staff play phone tag with the patient to explain how to make a proper records request which will allow them to release the information to the patient. The progressive organizations might send the patient an email. However, many of them will then ask the patient to mail, drop off or fax in the official records request. If this sounds painful, I can assure you that it’s as painful as it sounds.

This illustrates the massive disconnect between creating a great patient experience and most organization’s current records request process. Please note that I’m not blaming the digital team at hospitals for the issue and I’m not blaming the HIM people for this problem. I’m blaming the disconnect between the two organizations because the only way to solve this problem is to have both organizations involved.

The best patient experience would actually be for the patient to go to their patient portal and download their whole record. Maybe we’ll get their one day, but there are hundreds of systems in a hospital where a patient’s data is stored. So, it’s going to take a while for us to reach the point where a patient can self-service their data requests.

Since I’m not holding my breath on this amount of data sharing happening between disparate systems, I’m more interested in making the current processes so it’s a seamless experience for the patient. If you can model a medical records request on paper, then you can do it digitally. To their credit, I’ve seen a few organizations working on this. In fact, their system is part education about records requests and part getting the information that’s needed to fulfill a records request.

It’s time that HIM and a hospital’s digital and tech teams come together to make the process for requesting records a seamless patient experience. And if you think using a fax machine is a seamless experience for patients, then you’re part of the problem.

If you’d like to receive future HIM posts in your inbox, you can subscribe to future HIM Scene posts here.

Is There a Case to Be Made that Interoperability Saves Hospitals Money?

Posted on April 17, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Back in 2013 I argued that we needed a lot less talk and a lot more action when it came to interoperability in healthcare. It seemed very clear to me then and even now that sharing health data was the right thing to do for the patient. I have yet to meet someone who thinks that sharing a person’s health data with their providers is not the right thing to do for the patient. No doubt we shouldn’t be reckless with how we share the data, but patient care would improve if we shared data more than we do today.

While the case for sharing health data seems clear from the patient perspective, there were obvious business reasons why many organizations didn’t want to share their patients health data. From a business perspective it was often seen as an expense that they’d incur which could actually make them lose money.

These two perspectives is what makes healthcare interoperability so challenging. We all know it’s the right thing to do, but there are business reasons why it doesn’t make sense to invest in it.

While I understand both sides of the argument, I wondered if we could make the financial case for why a hospital or healthcare organization should invest in interoperability.

The easy argument is that value based care is going to require you to share data to be successful. That previous repeat X-ray that was seen as a great revenue source will become a cost center in a value based reimbursement world. At least that’s the idea and healthcare organizations should prepare for this. That’s all well and could, but the value based reimbursement stats show that we’re not there yet.

What are the other cases we can make for interoperability actually saving hospitals money?

I recently saw a stat that 70% of accidental deaths and injuries in hospitals are caused by communication issues. Accidental deaths and injuries are very expensive to a hospital. How many lives could be saved, hospital readmissions avoided, or accidental injuries could be prevented if providers had the right health data at the right place and the right time?

My guess is that not having the right healthcare data to treat a patient correctly is a big problem that causes a lot of patients to suffer needlessly. I wonder how many malpractice lawsuits could be avoided if the providers had the patients full health record available to them. Should malpractice insurance companies start offering healthcare organizations a doctors a discount if they have high quality interoperability solutions in their organization?

Obviously, I’m just exploring this idea. I’d love to hear your thoughts on it. Can interoperability solutions help a hospital save money? Are their financial reasons why interoperability should be implemented now?

While I still think we should make health data interoperability a reality because it’s the right thing to do for the patients, it seems like we need to dive deeper into the financial reasons why we should be sharing patient’s health data. Otherwise, we’ll likely never see the needle move when it comes to health data sharing.

How Much Does Healthcare Consumerism Matter to Hospital CIOs?

Posted on April 14, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Today I was greeted on Facebook with a quote from an interview the always wonderful Kate Gamble did with Michael Marino, Chief of IS Operations at Providence St. Joseph Health.

Patients don’t just want “the Marcus Welby experience anymore,” says Michael Marino.
“They want care where they want it, when they want it, how they want it.” The challenge? How to enable that without overburdening clinicians.

I found this evaluation to be spot on. It’s great to know that Michael Marino understands what patients want. However, he also understands how challenging it is going to be provide patients what they want.

The reality is that the system wasn’t set up to provide care “where they want it, when they want it, how they want it.” This is going to require a dramatic way in how we think about care and how we provide that care.

However, the 2nd part is the key point. How do we make this change without overburdening physicians. If the solution overburdens physicians, then it’s unlikely to happen. They’ll kick against the change and patients won’t get the change they desire.

There are simple, win-win solutions out there. Take for example a secure text with your patients with a picture attached. This can be a really efficient way for a doctor to interact with the patient. It can save the doctor and the patient time. It can discover issues earlier than if the patient waited for the next office visit. In some cases, it also frees up the doctors time to do a higher paying office visit.

How many hospital CIOs think about this shift in healthcare consumerism? My guess is that many are so overwhelmed by things like EHR complaints and cybersecurity challenges that most aren’t giving much of a 2nd thought to the shifting patient dynamics. Most of them have an idea that things are changing, but I imagine that most haven’t invested time and money in a way that will prepare them for this shift.

What’s your experience? Are hospital CIOs spending time on these changes? Should they be spending time on healthcare consumerism? What are the consequences if they don’t?

EHR Implementation Accomplished – What’s Next?

Posted on April 12, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

When you look at the world of hospital and health system EHR implementations, it’s fair to say that we can say Mission Accomplished. Depending on which numbers you use, they are all in the range of about 90% EHR adoption in hospitals. That’s a big shift from even 5-10 years ago when it comes to EHR adoption in hospitals. It’s amazing how quickly it shifted.

While it’s easy to sit back and think “Mission Accomplished” the reality is that we still have a LONG way to go when it comes to how we use the EHR. Yes, it’s “Mission Accomplished” as far as getting EHRs implemented. However, it’s just the start of the mission to make EHRs useful. I’d suggest that this is the task that will take up CIOs time the most over the next 5 years.

I think that most people looking at their EHR think about next steps in two large baskets:EHR Optimization and Extracting Value from EHR Data.

EHR Optimization
Most EHR software was slammed in so quickly that it left the users’ heads spinning. Hospitals were chasing the government money and so there was no time to think how the EHR was implemented and the best way to implement the EHR. We’re paying the price for these rushed EHR implementations now.

What’s most shocking to me is how many little things can be done for EHR end users to make their lives better. Many EHR users are suffering from poor training, lack of training, or at least an ignorance to what’s possible with the EHR. I’ve seen this first hand in the EHR implementations I’ve done. I know very clearly that a feature of the EHR was introduced and the users were shown how to do it and 6 months later when you show that feature to them they ask “Why didn’t you teach us this earlier?” Although, they then usually sheepishly say, “Did you teach us this before? I don’t remember it.” At this point it’s not about who we blame, but is about ensuring that every user is trained to the highest degree possible.

The other EHR optimization that many need is an evaluation of their EHR workflow. In most EHR implementations the organization replicates the paper processes. This is often not ideal. Now that the EHR is implemented, it’s a great time to think about why a process was done a certain way and see if there is a different workflow that makes more sense in the digital world. It’s amazing the efficiency you will find.

Extracting Value from EHR Data
As I just suggested, most EHR implementations end up being paper processes replicated electronically. This is not a bad thing, but it can often miss out on the potential value an EHR can provide. This is particularly true when it comes to how you use your EHR data. Most hospitals are still using EHR data the way they did in the paper world. We need to change our thinking if we want to extract the value from the EHR data.

I’ve always looked at EHR data like it was discovering a new world. Reports and analysis that were not even possible in the paper world now become so basic and obvious. The challenge often isn’t the reporting, but the realization that these new opportunities exist. In many cases, we haven’t thought this way and a change in thinking is always a challenge.

When thinking about extracting value from the EHR data, I like to think about it from two perspectives. First, can you provide information at the point of care that will make the patient care experience better for the provider and the patient? Second, can you use the EHR data to better understand an address the issues of a patient population? I’m sure there are other frames of reference as well, but these are two great places to start.

EHR Optimization and creating value from EHR data is going to be a great thing for everyone involved in healthcare and we’re just at the beginning of this process. I think it’s a huge part of what’s next for EHR. What’s your take? What are your plans for your EHR?

Poll: Providers Struggle To Roll Out Big Data Analytics

Posted on April 10, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

A new poll by a health IT publication has concluded that while healthcare organizations would like to roll out big data analytics projects, they lack many of the resources they need to proceed.

The online poll, conducted by HealthITAnalytics.com, found that half of respondents are hoping to recruit data science experts to serve as the backbone of their big analytics efforts. However, many are finding it very difficult to find the right staffers.

What’s more, such hires don’t come cheaply. In fact, one study found that data scientist salaries will range from $116,000 to $163,500 in 2017, a 6.4 percent increase over last year’s levels. (Other research concludes that a data scientist in management leading a team of 10 or more can draw up to $250,000 per year.) And even if the pricetag isn’t an issue, providers are competing for data science talent in a seller’s market, not only against other healthcare providers but also hungry employers in other industries.

Without having the right talent in place, many of providers’ efforts have been stalled, the publication reports. Roughly 31 percent of poll respondents said that without a data science team in place, they didn’t know how to begin implementing data analytics initiatives.

Meanwhile, 57 percent of respondents are still struggling with a range of predictable health IT challenges, including EMR optimization and workflow issues, interoperability issues and siloed data. Not only that, for some getting buy-in is proving difficult, with 34 percent reporting that their clinical end users aren’t convinced that creating analytics tools will pay off.

Interestingly, these results suggest that providers face bigger challenges in implementing health data than last year. In last year’s study by HealthITAnalytics.com, 47 percent said interoperability was a key challenge. What’s more, just 42 percent were having trouble finding analytics staffers for their team.

But at the same time, it seems like provider executives are throwing their weight behind these initiatives. The survey found that just 17 percent faced problems with getting executive buy-in and budget constraints this year, while more than half faced these issues in last year’s survey.

This squares with research released a few months ago by IT staffing firm TEKSystems, which found that 63 percent of respondents expected to see their 2017 budgets increase this year, a big change from the 41 percent who expected to see bigger budgets last year.

Meanwhile, despite their concerns, providers are coping well with at least some health IT challenges, the survey noted. In particular, almost 90 percent of respondents reported that they are live on an EMR and 65 percent are using a business intelligence or analytics solution.

And they’re also looking at the future. Three-quarters said they were already using or expect to enhance clinical decision making, along with more than 50 percent also focusing laboratory data, data gathered from partners and socioeconomic or community data. Also, using pharmacy data, patient safety data and post-acute care records were on the horizon for about 20 percent of respondents. In addition, 62 percent said that they were interested in patient-generated health data.

Taken together, this data suggests that as providers have shifted their focus to big data analytics– and supporting population health efforts – they’ve hit more speed bumps than expected. That being said, over the next few years, I predict that the supply of data scientists and demand for their talents should fall into alignment. For providers’ sake, we’d better hope so!

EMRs Can Improve Outcomes For Weekend Hospital Surgeries

Posted on April 7, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

Unfortunately, it’s well documented that people often have worse outcomes when they’re treated in hospitals over the weekend. For example, one recent study from the Association of Academic Physiatrists found that older adults admitted with head trauma over the weekend have a 14 percent increased risk of dying versus those admitted on a weekday.

But if a hospital makes good use of its EMR, these grim stats can be improved, according to a new study published in JAMA Surgery. In the study, researchers found that use of EMRs can significantly improve outcomes for hospital patients who have surgeries over the weekend.

To conduct the study, which was done by Loyola Medicine, a group of researchers identified some EMR characteristics which they felt could overcome the “weekend effect.” The factors they chose included using electronic systems designed to schedule surgeries seamlessly as well as move patients in and out of hospital rooms efficiently.

Their theories were based on existing research suggesting that patients at hospitals with electronic operating room scheduling were 33 percent less likely to experience a weekend effect than hospitals using paper-based scheduling. In addition, studies concluded patients at hospitals with electronic bed-management systems were 35 percent less likely to experience the weekend effect.

To learn more about the weekend effect, researchers analyzed the records provided by the AHRQ’s Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database.  Researchers looked at treatment and outcomes for 2,979 patients admitted to Florida hospitals for appendectomies, acute hernia repairs and gallbladder removals.

The research team found that 32 percent (946) of patients experienced the weekend effect, which they defined as having longer hospital stays than expected. Meanwhile, it concluded that patients at hospitals with high-speed EMR connectivity, EMR in the operating room, electronic operating room scheduling, CPOE systems and electronic bed management did better. (The analysis was conducted with the help of Loyola’s predictive analytics program.)

Their research follows on a 2015 Loyola study, published in Annals of Surgery, which named five factors that reduced the impact of the weekend effect. These included full adoption of electronic medical records, home health programs, pain management programs, increased registered nurse-to-bed ratios and inpatient physical rehabilitation.

Generally speaking, the study results offer good news, as they fulfill some the key hopes hospitals had when installing their EMR in the first place. But I was left wondering whether the study conflated cause and effect. Specifically, I found myself wondering whether hospitals with these various systems boosted their outcomes with technology, or whether hospitals that invested in these technologies could afford to provide better overall care.

It’s also worth noting that several of the improvement factors cited in the 2015 study did not involve technology at all. Even if a hospital has excellent IT systems in place, putting home health, pain management and physical rehabilitation in place – not to mention higher nurse-to-patient ratios – calls for different thinking and a different source of funding.

Still, it’s always good to know that health IT can generate beneficial results, especially high-ticket items like EMRs. Even incremental progress is still progress.

A Look at the HIM World with Dr. Jon Elion from ChartWise Medical Systems – HIM Scene

Posted on April 5, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

This post is part of the HIM Series of blog posts. If you’d like to receive future HIM posts in your inbox, you can subscribe to future HIM Scene posts here.

Healthcare Scene had a chance to interview Dr. Jon Elion, founder and president of ChartWise Medical Systems where we asked him about some of the big happenings in Health Information Management (HIM) and how world of HIM is evolving. Dr. Elion offers some really great insights into the HIM profession. You can watch the full video interview embedded at the bottom of this post or click on one of the questions below to hear Dr. Elion’s answer to that question.

Find more great Healthcare Scene Interviews.

If you’d like to receive future HIM posts in your inbox, you can subscribe to future HIM Scene posts here.

Avoiding Financial Losses After EMR Implementation

Posted on April 3, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

While hospitals buy EMRs to improve their operations – both clinically and financially – too often they take a hit before they work out the kinks in their installation.  In fact, healthcare institutions often end up losing up to 5 percent of their gross revenue after EMRs are implemented, according to consultant Erick McKesson.

One typical story comes from Maine Medical Center, which found that patient charges weren’t appearing after its $150 million Epic installation in 2012. These billing errors were one of the reasons the medical center posted a $13.4 million loss in the first six months after the installation, hospital executives reported.

But according to McKesson, managing consultant with Navigant, it’s possible to overcome these problems. In an article for Becker’s Hospital Review, he tells the story of a group of health systems which worked together to avoid such losses. The group worked together to identify the most valuable software features that flagged mischarges or reporting errors. They then identified the five charge program “edits” which had the largest financial impact.

Areas the cooperating health systems considered the most important included:

* Administrative codes

The health systems noted that incorrect administrative codes lead to lagging revenue. That’s particularly the case when there are different codes for the same procedure. Hospitals need to be sure that clinicians use the higher code if appropriate, which can be helped by the right technological fixes.

* Anesthesia

It’s important to monitor your charges when there are two distinct aspects of a single procedure that are charged separately, particularly with anesthesia services. If your audit system flags the absence of the added codes, it can recapture a substantial level of missing revenue.

* CT

Seeing to it that radiology charges are automatically reviewed can ensure that appropriate levels of revenue are generated. For example, in the case of CT exams, it’s important to see that charges are assessed for both the exam and if needed, the use of a contrast agent.

* Emergency Department

It’s not unusual for ED physicians to undercode high-acuity patients. But it’s important to address this issue, as undercoding can result in significant financial consequences.  Not only that, in addition to generating financial losses, undercoding can create problems with performance-based reimbursement contracts. If patients are depicted as less acute than they actually are, payors may expect better outcomes than the patients are likely to have. And that can lead to lower revenue or even significant financial penalties.

* Infusions

Auditing infusion charges can be very helpful in capturing added revenues, given that they are one of the most frequent charges in healthcare. Infusion codes are very complex, including the need to track start and stop times, difficult rules regarding what charges are appropriate during infusions and issues related to “carve out periods.” Auditing systems can help clinicians comply with requirements, including simple-to-create functions which automatically flag missing stop times.

As readers will doubtless know, getting competing health systems to engage in “coopetition” can be tough, even if it helps them improve their operations. But given the need to combat post-EMR lags in revenue, maybe more of them will risk it in the future.