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!

Apparently, Hospital EHR Use Still Has A Long Way To Go

Posted on August 20, 2018 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare branding and communications expert with more than 25 years of industry experience. and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also worked extensively healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

It’s fairly easy to look back at the progress hospitals have made with EHR use and be impressed. In less than 10 years, most hospitals have gone from largely paper-based processes to relying on EHRs to support a wide range of clinical processes. Even given that hospitals got meaningful use incentives for EHR adoption it’s still a big deal.

That being said, we’ve still got a long way to go before hospitals exploit EHRs fully, according to a new research study. The study, which appears in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, concludes that it will take until 2035 for the majority of hospitals to put a fully mature EHR infrastructure in place.

To conduct the study, researchers relied on the HIMSS Electronic Medical Record Adoption Model (EMRAM) dataset, which ranks a hospital’s adoption of varied EHR functions considered important to hospital care quality and efficiency. The researchers sifted through EMRAM data for 2006 to 2014 and then leveraged them to predict future adoption levels through the year 2035.

After analyzing the data, the research team found that the majority of US hospitals were in EMRAM Stages 0, 1 and 2 in 2006 and that by 2014, most hospitals had achieved Stages 3, 4 and 5. Having analyzed this data, researchers predicted that Stage 5 use should peak by 2019 and Stage 6 levels of use by 2026.

Where things really start to get interesting is the path from Stages 5, 6 or 7 EMRAM. The study concluded that while most hospitals would reach these stages by 2020, a “considerable” share of hospitals won’t achieve Stage 7 by 2035.

It’s no surprise to read that as the level of sophistication needed grows, the number of hospitals that have achieved it tails off, with just a few likely to hit the prized Stage 7 in the near future. Developing a mature infrastructure calls for an infusion of time, talent and funding, and even resource-rich health systems might not have all three at the same time.

Also, given that one of the key requirements of Stage 7 is having interoperability functionalities in place, it’s easy to see why many hospitals won’t get there anytime soon. Heck, there’s good reason to wonder whether the bulk of hospitals will ever achieve interoperability, at least as it’s currently defined.

But do we need to measure everything by EMRAM standards? I don’t know, but it does seem that the question worth asking after defaulting to these measures for many years.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not an EMRAM critic. It certainly seems to have done a good job of tracking hospital EHR progress for quite some time and it can be used by leaders to create a common goal for a healthcare organization. On the other hand, if it predicts that it will take more than a decade for hospitals to develop a mature EHR ecosystem, despite their pouring endless resources into the game, maybe it’s worth reevaluating this model. Just a thought.

Is It Worth The Trouble To Drop Fax Use?

Posted on August 17, 2018 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare branding and communications expert with more than 25 years of industry experience. and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also worked extensively healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

Not long ago, ONC held its 2nd Interoperability Forum in Washington, DC. One of the big ideas being kicked around at the event was killing the use of fax machines to share health data.

During her keynote address, CMS leader Seema Verma went so far as to say that she’d like to see all provider organizations go fax-free by 2020. Apparently, Verma wants providers to switch to other means of digital information sharing.

Sounds good, right?  Well, maybe not. Despite its flaws, faxing does have the advantage of being easy to use, available in virtually every provider office and fairly reliable. I’m not sure we can say that about most other forms of digital health data exchange. In fact, dropping faxing may leave doctors with bigger problems than they had before.

After all, before we stop faxing, we’ll have to find a digital document format that plays nicely with other systems and makes patient information easy to access. That, not surprisingly, may be tougher than it sounds.

I particularly like the way Jay Anders, MD, broke these issues down in a recent email message. Anders, chief medical officer of Medicomp Systems, makes the following observations:

  • E-paper may not be interoperable: In fact, it may create new barriers to data sharing, he suggests: “Electronic paper is not effective. It [can] create a data tsunami in healthcare – a flood of clinical data that physicians cannot access at the right time with the right patient.”
  • Free text is a burden: While e-documents may be easy to pass back and forth, making use of the data within can be really tough, he says. “When the EHRs receive these PDFs with mountains of free text, how do they interpret that data? How do they present that data to physicians? How do they make that data into actionable information?

His bottom line here is that while providers can use e-documents to share data, there’s no point in trying unless they can offer useful information at the point of care.

After taking in Anders’ questions, I have another one of my own. If providers will still need to go through contortions to extract data from e-documents, how is that better than using faxes? After all, if you run faxed documents through a sophisticated OCR process, you can capture and even format health data information.

In other words, given the issues inherent in using digital documents, putting faxing to bed may not be worth the trouble. I have to agree with Anders’ conclusion: “So, how does sending electronic communication of scanned PDFs rather than faxes enable interoperability? The answer is that it doesn’t.”

For another view on Seema’s comments and the fax machine in healthcare, check out John Lynn’s post on the real problem when it comes to replacing fax machines in healthcare.

Within Two Years, 20% Of Healthcare Orgs Will Be Using Blockchain

Posted on August 16, 2018 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare branding and communications expert with more than 25 years of industry experience. and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also worked extensively healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

I don’t know about you, but to me, blockchain news seems to be all over the map. It’s like a bunch of shiny objects. Here! Look at the $199 zillion investment this blockchain company just picked up! Wow! Giant Hospital System is using blockchain to automate its cafeteria! And so on. It gets a bit tiring.

However, I’m happy to say that the latest piece of blockchain news to cross my desk seems boring (and practical) in comparison. The news is that according to a Computerworld piece, 20% of healthcare organizations should be using blockchain for operations management and patient identity by 2020, or in other words within two years. And to be clear, we’re talking about systems in day-to-day use, not pilot projects.

The stats come from a report by analyst firm IDC Health Insights, which takes a look at, obviously, blockchain use in the healthcare industry. In the report, researchers note that healthcare has been slower out of the blockchain gate than other industries for reasons that include regulatory and security concerns and blockchain resource availability. Oh, and while the story doesn’t spell this out, good ol’ conservative decision-making has played its part too.

But now things are changing. IDC predicts that in addition to supporting internal operations, blockchain could form the basis for a new health information exchange architecture. Specifically, blockchain could be used to create a mesh network capable of sharing information between stakeholders such as providers, pharmacies, insurance payers and clinical researchers, the report suggests. This architecture could be far more useful than the existing point-to-point approach HIEs use now, as it would be more flexible, more fault-tolerant and less prone to bottlenecks.

As part of the report, IDC offers some advice to healthcare organizations interested in taking on blockchain options. It includes recommendations that they:

  • See to it that any blockchain-related decisions are evidence-based and informed and that stakeholders share information about the pros and cons of blockchain interoperability freely
  • Develop a blockchain interoperability proof of concept which demonstrates how decentralized, distributed and immutable properties could make a contribution
  • Pitch the benefits of blockchain interoperability to providers and patients, letting them know that it could eliminate barriers to getting the data they need when and where they need it
  • Adopt blockchain interoperability early if at all, as this can offer benefits even prior to implementation, and gives leaders a chance to tackle concerns privately if need be

Of course, these suggestions and factoids barely scratch the surface of the blockchain discussion, which is why IDC gets $4,000 a copy for the full report. (Though I should note that the article goes into a lot more depth than I have here.)

Regardless, what came across to me from the article was nonetheless worth thinking about when kicking around possible blockchain strategies. Broadly speaking, providers should get in early, keep everyone involved (including patients and providers ), work out differences over its use privately and see to it that your rollout meets concrete needs. You may want to also read this article on 5 blockchain uses for healthcare. It may not be in places you’d have thought previously.

And now, back to silly blockchain news. I’ll let you know when another set of practical ideas shows up.

The Biggest Lesson Learned from IBM Watson

Posted on August 13, 2018 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.

There’s no sexier marketing story than IBM Watson. When IBM Watson beat Ken Jennings on Jeopardy, there was an explosion of coverage. The most promising area for IBM Watson was healthcare. However, as the Wall Street Journal recently reported, IBM Watson has fallen short of expectations in healthcare.

More than a dozen IBM partners and clients have halted or shrunk Watson’s oncology-related projects. Watson cancer applications have had limited impact on patients, according to dozens of interviews with medical centers, companies, and doctors who have used it, as well as documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

In many cases, the tools didn’t add much value. In some cases, Watson wasn’t accurate. Watson can be tripped up by a lack of data in rare or recurring cancers, and treatments are evolving faster than Watson’s human trainers can update the system. Dr. Chase of Columbia said he withdrew as an adviser after he grew disappointed in IBM’s direction for marketing the technology.

No published research shows Watson improving patient outcomes.

No doubt, part of the problem is that IBM Watson could never live up to the hype. The hype was too big. However, it seems that IBM Watson has really fallen short from even the most conservative hopes for it. That’s a big problem.

One thing that’s interesting about IBM Watson is that they spent no marketing on it. Especially in healthcare. At the IBM Think events the past couple years they didn’t have any healthcare press or influencers at their event. Their marketing team’s response was that they didn’t have any budget to market to healthcare because they got so much coverage for IBM Watson already.

Fair enough. IBM Watson has gotten a ton of exposure in healthcare, but maybe if they’d invited the press they could have had some real conversations about whether IBM Watson was real or was it memorex (Sorry for those that don’t know this old reference). While not always the case, the healthcare IT press and influencers are a different breed that asks deeper questions about a product and what it can do to impact healthcare. It feels like IBM Watson had so much hype that not enough people held them accountable for actually delivering results to healthcare organizations.

From the same WSJ article linked above is this great quote:

“The discomfort that I have—and that others have had with using it—has been the sense that you never know what you’re really going to get…and how much faith you can put in those results,” said Lukas Wartman of the McDonnell Genome Institute at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Dr. Wartman said he rarely uses the system, despite having complimentary access.

The concepts of AI and machine learning that IBM Watson represent are incredible and I believe will impact healthcare for good. However, it’s still not there yet. The trust isn’t there.

The core lesson I take from IBM Watson is that things like Jeopardy can create hype for a certain product, but in healthcare we need more than hype. We need trust. If a healthcare provider can’t trust the result, then your product won’t go anywhere and won’t be used. Unfortunately for IBM Watson, beating Ken Jennings on Jeopardy creates a lot of awareness, but does nothing to build trust.

The jury is still out on IBM Watson on healthcare. They’ve spent billions on it and so it’s not like it’s going to just disappear. Hopefully, it does turn the corner and becomes a trusted tool for many in healthcare. Trust just takes consistency over time. That’s an important lesson for many healthcare IT products.

Edge Computing Provides Security for EHR, Healthcare Applications

Posted on August 10, 2018 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Eric Fischer is the Digital Marketing Specialist for Estone Technology.

As more and more practices, both small and large, move from traditional patient records to fully electronic health records, the advantages of cloud-based EHR systems are becoming more readily apparent. In a cloud-based EHR system, data is stored on an external server, usually owned and operated by a third-party company, reducing an individual practice’s investment. Setup is often limited to installing certain software, and subsequently, data can be accessed anywhere.

However, in the modern day of HIPAA rules and patient privacy regulations, sending all of your patient data to a third party service can be dangerous if not managed properly. Even worse, as more and more devices gain intelligence and connectivity, joining the Internet of Things, patient data is often sent as soon as it as gathered, without human input, creating backlogs of pointless data and additional windows for data theft or misuse.  Though cloud-based records systems should offer flawless security, it only takes one person at any level in data processing to be careless with their password, or one device affected with malware to render patient records totally insecure. In a recently reported story, a security expert identified a data breach caused when an employee plugged their eCigarette into their work computer’s USB port to charge. The eCigarette had been loaded with secret data harvesting software.

The IoT has made the problem more severe as it grows, as many simple, connected devices lack any sort of security measures whatsoever, and simply send gathered data on as they have been programmed to do, no matter how they were programmed to do so. It is shockingly simple for these devices to be compromised and misused. The benefits of patient data recorders that automatically send their data to EHR’s is obvious, but the danger is also quite clear.

Cloud-Based IoT systems automatically send much of requested patient data from sensors directly to third party companies, ripe for data theft as well as failure in a network outage. *Data from the Journal of Intensive and Critical Care.

Fortunately, there is a solution. As small, embedded chips and boards have become more and more powerful, the need to send all data to the cloud to be processed and stored has lessened. Today, the IoT is shifting rapidly towards a new model of computing – Edge Computing. In this new computing format, data from individual IoT devices like patient monitors and data recorders is processed by intelligent, embedded boards and devices at the edge of the local network. Once the processing has been completed, any relevant data can be encrypted and forwarded to the cloud for additional processing and storage.

This improves data security in a few very simple, fundamental ways – first of all, more data stays local. Everything from blood pressure to MRI scans can be processed locally by edge devices using machine learning techniques. Most of this data is, of course, irrelevant and can be discarded. But when the Edge Computing device identifies something important, it can forward that data to the cloud-based EHR system, ready for additional use.

Secondly, since these devices are more powerful, and managed locally, they’re easier to secure than other IoT devices, or third-party managed cloud devices. It’s possible to load embedded boards performing edge computing functions with modern operating systems and anti-malware programs that keep data secure. This barrier between your internal devices, and the digital world offers a layer of protection for your most sensitive patient data.

Developers of hospital networks and hospital IT managers, EHR software developers, and other healthcare information technology professionals can work with hardware designers and manufacturing firms to discuss Edge Computing solutions for themselves and their customers.

About Eric Fischer
Eric Fischer is the Digital Marketing Specialist for Estone Technology – a designer and manufacturer of OEM/ODM computer solutions for Medical and Rugged Industries. Our solutions include specialized Tablet and Panel PCs, Embedded Boards, and Industrial Computers. We offer solutions that are IEC-60601 certified, waterproof, and antimicrobial, specialized for hospital environments.

Experts Tell All: How Leaders Ensure Successful Healthcare ERP Adoption

Posted on August 9, 2018 I Written By

The following is a guest blog post by Sallie Parkhurst, Carol Mortimer, Michelle Sanders, and Heather Haugen PhD from Atos Digital Health Solutions.

According to Gartner, approximately 75% of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementations fail despite the significant opportunity for process management improvement in key business areas including human resources, payroll, supply chain management, and finance.  We gathered critical feedback from experts who have lived through hundreds of implementations across a broad spectrum of industries. Their advice was insightful!

Our discussion focused on three distinct areas where leaders should focus in order to avoid some of the common missteps of large complex implementations. That is, leaders must clearly define their strategic approach to these key business functions beyond the selection of ERP tools. This work spans the system selection and implementation phases of an ERP project. Engaging the appropriate internal experts early in the process ensures effective governance, reality in the “current state” and data accuracy.  This effort is required for the entire life cycle of an ERP.  Finally, leaders need to consider the resources, time and leadership required to continue successful adoption after implementation; this is often left until after implementation and creates significant financial surprises and resource constraints.

Clearly Defined Strategy:

  • Leadership and Communication: Most ERP systems have an impressive array of functions and options to make processes more efficient and effective. How those systems are used in your organization must be defined, communicated, and governed throughout the entire process.  The leadership team is ultimately responsible for this effort, but must consider how to best communicate and engage the entire organization to achieve the goals.  The change management effort is quite extensive and is a key predictor of success!
  • Functionality: The functionality you need should be driven based on your business needs. While this seems obvious, many organizations buy a suite of products that includes more advanced functionality than they need, functionality they can’t take advantage of because of other system constraints, or functionality that requires data from other systems they don’t have. Set the parameters for demos and consider defining the scenarios to get an accurate picture of system capabilities for your specific needs.
  • Interfaces: ERP systems can interface with many different systems ranging from clinical systems to warehouse applications. This is a great opportunity to ensure better overall integration of business processes, but don’t underestimate the work required. Ask about the cost of interfaces, maintenance required, potential impact from upgrades, and any limitations of your current systems and data specifications for accurate and efficient electronic transmission. Also, be sure to ask about any third party vendor software required during discussions involving interfaces.

Engagement of Experts:

  • Knowledge Experts: Most organizations don’t engage their internal experts early enough in the project. Involving your subject matter experts during system selection can be tricky, but it pays big dividends in the end. These experts know the current systems or manual processes, but they also know the workarounds and issues that need to be addressed. Ensure that these people are also involved in defining data tables and other “area specific” customization.
  • Document Current State: This is cumbersome work, but organizations that take the time to define their current workflows gain more efficiency and cost savings from their new ERP systems. When this step is skipped, implementations stressors (time and resources) force the new system to mimic old system processes or manual processes that degrade the overall value of the new system.
  • Competencies and Development: Your new ERP system will probably stretch your team’s competencies, and will often require additional team training. This is a great opportunity to offer growth opportunities in your organization.  It may also require hiring for specific skill sets.
  • Priorities: The toughest question a leader faces when implementing a new system is “What are we going to stop doing to ensure the success of this effort?” Give your team time to focus on and perform high quality work.

Long-Term Commitment

  • Resource commitments: Any large system capable of making dramatic improvements in efficiency and accuracy of business processes will always require an investment of time and resources after implementation. Organizations almost always underestimate the long-term investment associated with maintenance, upgrades, training, and optimization. However, organizations that commit even a few hours per week in a disciplined manner find it easy to maintain and even improve on the value they expect from their ERP.
  • Beyond implementation – achieving adoption: The difference between simply installing a system and achieving business value lies in the long-term commitment by an organization’s leaders to optimize the use of the system.

ERP tools offer a significant opportunity to better manage critical business functions, but adoption of those systems requires:

  1. A clearly defined strategy for the key ERP business functions you plan to implement;
  2. Engagement of your internal experts early and often; and
  3. Commitment of resources and funds to realize the value of your investment.

About the Authors: 

  • Sallie Parkhurst is Senior Project Manager and an expert in Finance for ERP implementations for Digital Health Solutions Consulting, Atos.
  • Carol Mortimer is Senior Consultant and an expert in Supply Chain Management for ERP implementations for Digital Health Solutions Consulting, Atos.
  • Michelle Sanders is Senior Project Manager and an expert in HR and Payroll for ERP implementations for Digital Health Solutions Consulting, Atos.
  • Heather Haugen is the Chief Science Officer for Atos Digital Health Solutions.
  • Inbal Vuletich serves as the editor for Atos Digital Health Solution publications.

What Clients Value about Atos’ ERP Solutions and Services:

  • Expertise across all ERP business functions
  • Depth of knowledge of the ERP systems and how they function in various environments
  • The combination of industry expertise and system expertise
  • Ability to solve problems and understand clients’ challenges
  • How our team cares about their problems and challenges like they are our own

About Atos Digital Health Solutions
Atos Digital Health Solutions helps healthcare organizations clarify business objectives while pursuing safer, more effective healthcare that manages costs and engagement across the care continuum. Our leadership team, consultants, and certified project and program managers bring years of practical and operational hospital experience to each engagement. Together, we’ll work closely with you to deliver meaningful outcomes that support your organization’s goals. Our team works shoulder-to-shoulder with your staff, sharing what we know openly. The knowledge transfer throughout the process improves skills and expertise among your team as well as ours. We support a full spectrum of products and services across the healthcare enterprise including Population Health, Value-Based Care, Security and Enterprise Business Strategy Advisory Services, Revenue Cycle Expertise, Adoption and Simulation Programs, ERP and Workforce Management, Go-Live Solutions, EHR Application Expertise, as well as Legacy and Technical Expertise. Atos is a proud sponsor of Healthcare Scene.

Hospitals That Share Patients Don’t Share Patient Data

Posted on August 7, 2018 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare branding and communications expert with more than 25 years of industry experience. and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also worked extensively healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

If anyone in healthcare needs to catch up on your records, it’s another provider who is treating mutual patients. In this day and age, there’s no good reason why clinicians at one hospital should be guessing what the other would get (or not get as the case is far too often).

Over the last few years, we’ve certainly seen signs of data sharing progress. For example, in early August the marriage between health data sharing networks CommonWell and Carequality was consummated, with providers using Cerner and Greenway Health going live with their connections.

Still, health data exchange is far more difficult than it should be. Despite many years of trying, hospitals still don’t share data with each other routinely, even when they’re treating the same patient.

To learn more about this issue, researchers surveyed pairs of hospitals likely to share patients across the United States. The teams chose pairs which referred the largest volume of patients to each other in a given hospital referral region.

After reaching out to many facilities, the researchers ended up with 63 pairs of hospitals. Researchers then asked them how likely they were to share patient health information with nearby institutions with whom they share patients.

The results, which appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, suggest that while virtually all of the hospitals they studied could be classified as routinely sharing data by federal definitions, that didn’t tell the whole story.

For one thing, while 97% of respondents met the federal guidelines, only 63% shared data routinely with hospitals with the highest shared patient (HSP) volume.

In fact, 23% of respondents reported that information sharing with their HSP hospital was worse than with other hospitals, and 48% said there was no difference. Just 17% said they enjoyed better sharing of patient health data with their HSP volume hospital.

It’s not clear how to fix the problem highlighted in the JAMIA study. While HIEs have been lumbering along for well more than a decade, only a few regional players seem to have developed a trusted relationship with the providers in their area.

The techniques HIEs use to foster such loyalty, which include high-touch methods such as personal check-ins with end users, don’t seem to work as well for some HIE they do for others. Not only that, HIE funding models still vary, which can have a meaningful impact on how successful they’ll be overall.

Regardless, it would be churlish to gloss over the fact that almost two-thirds of hospitals are getting the right data to their peers. I don’t know about you, but this seems like a hopeful development.

Hospitals Struggle To Get Users On Board With Mobile Policies

Posted on August 6, 2018 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare branding and communications expert with more than 25 years of industry experience. and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also worked extensively healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

A new survey has found that hospitals are having a hard time managing and tracking user compliance with mobile communications policies.

The survey, which was conducted in early 2018 by communications vendor Spok, collected information on mobile device communications strategies from approximately 300 healthcare professionals. Forty-four percent of respondents were clinicians, 10% were IT and telecom staff, 6% were executive leaders, and another 40% had a wide variety of healthcare roles.

Spok found that hospitals who do have a mobile strategy in place have had one for a long time, with 42% having had such a strategy for either 3 to 5 years or more than five years. Another 46% have had a formal mobile strategy for one to three years. Only 12% have had a strategy in place for one year or less.

Reasons they cited for creating mobile device strategies included the launch of a communication initiative (46%); a clinical initiative (25%); or a technology initiative (24%). Five percent of responses were “other.” Top areas of focus for these strategies included mobile management and security (56%), mobile device selection (52%) and integration with the EHR (48%).

Other reasons for mobile initiatives included clinical workflow evaluation (43%), device ownership strategy/BYOD (34%), mobile apps strategy (29%), mobile app catalog (16%), mobile strategy governance (14%) and business intelligence and reporting strategy (12%).

However, there’s little agreement as to which hospital department should monitor compliance. Forty-three percent of respondents said the security team was monitoring policies for the hospital or system, 43% rely on a telecommunications team, 43% said a clinical informatics team played that role, and 26% had monitoring done by a mobile team. Twenty-one percent said individual departments enforce mobile policies and 9% said they don’t have an enforcement method in place. Another 9% of responses fell into the “other” category.

Given the degree to which monitoring varies between institutions, it’s little wonder to learn that policies aren’t enforced effectively in many cases. On the one hand, 39% respondents said the policies were enforced extremely well most of the time, and one-third said they were enforced well most the time. However, 4% said the policies were being enforced poorly and inconsistently, and 44% said they are not sure about how well the policies are being enforced.

Hospitals are aware of this problem, though, and many are taking steps to ensure that users understand and comply with mobile policies. According to the survey, 48% offer educational programs on the subject, 42% use technology or data gathered from devices to measure and track compliance, 37% leverage direct feedback from users and 23% use surveys.

Still, 21% said they don’t have a way to validate compliance — which suggests that hospitals have a lot more work to do.

Phishing Attack On Hospital Could Impact 1.4 Million Patients

Posted on August 3, 2018 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare branding and communications expert with more than 25 years of industry experience. and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also worked extensively healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

A hospital in West Des Moines, Iowa has entered its third month of public disclosure after experiencing a data breach which could impact 1.4 million patients.

On May 31st, UnityPoint Health discovered that a phishing attack on its business email system had created a breach. Its investigation found that the company got a series of fraudulent emails pretending to have come from an executive within UnityPoint. After contacting law enforcement and beginning to research the situation, UnityPoint disclosed the existence of the breach to the public.

The patient information exposed includes names, addresses, dates of birth, medical record numbers and insurance information. Cyber attackers may also have gotten access to patient Social Security numbers and/or drivers’ license numbers. In a limited number of cases, attackers might even have been able to access patients’ payment card or bank account numbers.

Since then, UnityPoint has continued to keep its patients aware of any news on the situation, a painful yet necessary process which can help it rebuild its credibility. After all, it’s likely that the news of UnityPoint’s breach will get consumers very upset.

In fact, a new survey by SCOUT in partnership with The Harris Poll found that 49% of America adults are extremely or very concerned about the security of their personal health information. Given the fact that they’ve been hit with news of such breaches very regularly in recent years, it’s little wonder.

It’s worth noting that many consumers aren’t using online healthcare tools very often. For example, while 39% of those aged 18 to 34 used online portals to access their health information, all told only 36% of Americans overall use this technology.

As their health information knowledge increases, though, most patients become more concerned with what providers do to protect the privacy and security of their healthcare data. They learn how valuable this data is to potential buyers, and how there’s a ready market for their data in clandestine, impossible-to-track sites on the Dark Web.

Also, as the tenor of news coverage shifts from technical terms like “data breach” to tales of what happened to specific consumers, it’s likely that consumers will develop a more realistic view of what’s at stake here. If they’re freaked out at that point, they’ve probably figured out how a breach could impact their lives.

Healthcare AI Adoption Curve – Where Is Your Hospital At?

Posted on July 30, 2018 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.


The above image is the best one I’ve seen when it comes to the adoption and integration of AI into healthcare. Of course, this same chart has been used to describe the integration of technology into healthcare in general. The reason this chart is so relevant is that very few healthcare organizations have reached the point where they are an IT enabled business with IT embedded in business with hybrid, cross-functional roles. If this is true for technology in general, AI is still way out there.

In fact, the one complaint I have about this chart is that it’s missing a bubble that should say “What’s AI?” Ok, that’s a little bit of an exaggeration, but not much for many healthcare organizations. They’d more appropriately ask “How can I use AI in healthcare?” but it’s about the same point. Most aren’t there yet, but they’re going to have to get there. AI is coming and in a big way.

The good news is that most of the AI a healthcare organization will use will be embedded in the IT systems they purchase. This is why it’s so important that healthcare organizations have good vendor partners. Healthcare organizations aren’t going to enable this AI future. They’re going to partner with vendors who bring the AI to bear for them. When David Chou shared the image above, he asked the right question “What is your role as the CIO for the adoption of AI?” How many of you know the answer to that question?

If you’re not sure the answer, check out this other image and tweet that David Chou shared about using AI for automation:

I agree 100% with David Chou that if you want to start thinking about how to utilize AI, then start with repetitive tasks which can and should be automated. Take the mundane out of your healthcare providers lives. That will create some early AI wins that will help you to be able to build an AI driven culture in your organization.