Statement of
John R. Clarke, M.D.
Professor of Surgery
Drexel University
and
Adjunct Professor of Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
and
Member, Committee on Data Standards for Patient Safety
Board on Health Care Services
Institute of Medicine
The National Academies
March 17, 2004
Introduction
Good morning, Chairman Buyer and members of the Committee. My name is
John Clarke. I am a professor of surgery at Drexel University in
Philadelphia, an adjunct professor of computer and information science
at the University of Pennsylvania, and the physician project manager for
the Pennsylvania patient safety reporting system. I have also served two
years in the U.S. Army, primarily as an emergency physician at Martin
Army Hospital in Ft. Benning, GA, and two years as Chief of the Medical
College of Pennsylvania’s Surgical Service at the Philadelphia VA
Medical Center.
Over the past two years, I have served as a member of the Committee on
Data Standards for Patient Safety of the Institute of Medicine. The
Institute of Medicine is part of the National Academies, chartered by
Congress in 1863 to advise the government on matters of science and
technology.
The study that I am going to talk about today sought to foster health
data standards to improve patient safety. The study was sponsored by the
Department of Health and Human Services. A major part of the study’s
recommendations concerned the use of electronic health record systems.
A National Health Information Infrastructure Is Needed
All Americans, whether in service to our country or in civilian life,
should be able to expect to receive health care that is safe. To achieve
this, a new health care delivery system is needed – a system that
provides accurate information that both prevents errors and learns from
them when they occur. The development of such a system requires, first,
a commitment by all stakeholders to a culture of safety and, second,
improved information systems.
Specifically, a national health information infrastructure is needed:
• To provide immediate access to complete patient information and
decision-support tools for clinicians and their patients, and
• To capture patient safety information and other quality of care
outcome measures as by-products of care and use this information to
design even safer delivery systems.
Electronic health record systems and health data standards are both
crucial building blocks of the national health information
infrastructure.
Definition of an Electronic Health Record System
What does our committee mean by an electronic health record system? An
Electronic health record system includes a longitudinal collection of
electronic health information for and about individuals. It also
provides immediate electronic access to individual- and population-level
information by authorized users, and provides clinical knowledge and
decision-support that enhance the quality, safety, and efficiency of
patient care. It provides the essential information infrastructure for
an efficient health care delivery system.
Benefits of Electronic Health Record Systems
The standard use of electronic health records has enormous potential to
improve the safety, quality, and efficiency of health care in the United
States, as called for in previous Institute of Medicine reports.
More immediate access to computer-based clinical information, such as
laboratory and radiology results, can reduce redundancy and improve
quality. Computer-assisted diagnosis and care management programs can
improve clinical decision making and adherence to clinical guidelines
designed to optimize outcomes.
Computer-based reminder systems for patients and clinicians can improve
compliance with protocols for disease prevention. Likewise, the
availability of complete patient health information at the point of care
delivery, together with clinical decision support systems such as those
supporting physician order entry, can prevent many errors and adverse
events (injuries caused by medical management rather than by the
underlying disease or condition of the patient) from occurring.
With a robust IT infrastructure, patient health information can be
shared among all authorized participants in a patient’s health care
community.
Challenges
There are some excellent examples of successful electronic health
records in health care settings in both the private and public sectors.
A handful of communities and systems have established secure platforms
for the exchange of data among providers, suppliers, patients, and other
authorized users. Among the most notable of these are the systems
developed by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the Department
of Defense DOD).
Other examples are the New England Healthcare Electronic Data
Interchange Network, the Indiana Network for Patient Care, Intermountain
Health Care, the Santa Barbara County Care Data Exchange, the Patient
Safety Institute’s National Benefit Trust Network, and the Markle
Foundation’s Healthcare Collaborative Network.
But these examples are the exception, not the rule. In most of the
nation’s hospitals, orders for medications, laboratory tests, x-ray
studies, and other services are still written on paper, and many
hospitals lack even the capability to deliver laboratory, radiology,
pathology, and other results in an automated fashion. The situation is
no different in most small practice settings, where there has been
little migration to electronic records.
In addition to purely technological challenges, there are sizable
policy, organizational, and financial challenges that must be addressed
to facilitate the adoption of electronic health record systems. Some
attempts to introduce computerized provider order entry systems and
other components of an electronic health record system have been
unsuccessful. Currently available personal health records, which allow
patients to enter their own information, have demonstrated limited
functionality to date.
Encouraging Deployment
Government health care programs, along with various private-sector
stakeholders, are considering options to encourage the implementation of
electronic health record systems by providers. To achieve widespread
implementation, some external funding, incentive programs, or other
federal initiatives will be necessary. For example, the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services might provide some form of financial
reward to providers participating in the Medicare program that have
deployed electronic health record systems.
On the private-sector side, various insurers, purchasers, and employer
groups are instituting quality incentive programs for specific
electronic health record system functionalities, such as computerized
provider order entry for prescription drugs and electronic reporting of
performance measures.
In addition, a number of employers, health plans, and physicians have
recently formed a coalition called Bridges to Excellence, which will
provide financial bonuses to providers to encourage improved patient
care management systems, including electronic health record systems.
Another option is to provide grant funding or access to “low-cost”
capital to enable providers, especially those with a safety net
function, to invest in acquiring electronic health record systems.
Certain regulatory strategies might also be pursued, such as requiring
providers to have an electronic health record system as a condition of
participation in Medicare.
Consideration should also be given to the best means of creating
public-private partnerships in a geographic area to leverage existing
resources and to ensure that no providers (for example, safety net
providers) or citizens are excluded. One possibility might be for state
government, VHA and private-sector health care organizations and vendors
to work in partnership to establish information and communications
technology infrastructure. Additional support may be provided to the VHA
so that it can offer safety net providers (e.g., public hospitals and
community health centers) the opportunity to participate in the VHA’s
information and communications technology system and receive technical
assistance for that purpose.
To implement any of the above strategies, one must first clearly define
a functional model of the key capabilities for an electronic health
record system. The committee’s report detailed essential components of
such a functional model.
Health Care Data Standards Are Also Needed
Electronic health records are important components of the national
health information infrastructure. But to ensure that health information
is understandable to all users and can be exchanged efficiently between
health care settings, health care data standards are also needed.
The National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics, a public-private
advisory committee established to provide advice to Department of Health
and Human Services and Congress on national health information policy,
has for many years recommended that the federal government assume a more
active role in establishing national data standards. In 1996, Congress
passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which
mandated standardization of administrative and financial transactions.
In 2001, the Consolidated Health Informatics (CHI) initiative, an
inter-agency effort, was established as part of the Office of Management
and Budget’s eGOV initiative to streamline and consolidate government
programs among like sectors. The mission of the CHI initiative is to
articulate and execute a coherent strategy for the adoption of federal
interoperability standards for health care information. Department of
Health and Human Services was designated the managing partner for the
CHI initiative, with both the Department of Defense and the Veterans
Administration being major partners in the initiative. The CHI
initiative played a pivotal role in the recent decision by the federal
government that programs of the Department of Health and Human Services,
the Veterans Administration, and the Department of Defense would
incorporate certain data standards and terminologies.
The CHI initiative, although off to a very promising start, lacks a
clear mandate to establish standards. In addition, once initial
standards and gaps have been identified, the future of the initiative is
unclear. The initiative would also benefit from closer collaboration
with the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS) to
ensure the active participation of private-sector stakeholders.
The Committee’s Recommendations regarding Health Care Data Standards
The Data Standards for Patient Safety Committee recommended that
Congress should provide clear direction, enabling authority, and
financial support for the establishment of national (not just federal)
standards for data that support patient safety. Various government
agencies will need to assume major new responsibilities, and additional
support will be required. Specifically:
(1) The Department of Health and Human Services should be given the lead
role in establishing and maintaining a public-private partnership for
the promulgation of standards for data that support patient safety.
(2) The Consolidated Health Informatics initiative, in collaboration
with the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics, should
identify data standards appropriate for national adoption and identify
gaps in existing standards that need to be addressed. The membership of
National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics should continue to be
broad and diverse, with adequate representation of all stakeholders,
including consumers, state governments, professional groups, and
standards-setting bodies.
(3) The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality in collaboration with
the National Library of Medicine and others should provide
administrative and technical support for the CHI and NCVHS efforts. In
particular, these agencies should ensure the development of
implementation guides, certification procedures, and conformance testing
for all data standards. They should also provide financial support and
oversight for developmental activities to fill gaps in data standards.
And, finally, these agencies should coordinate activities and maintain a
clearinghouse of information in support of national data standards and
their implementation to improve patient safety.
(4) The National Library of Medicine should be designated as the
responsible entity for distributing all national clinical terminologies
that relate to patient safety, and for ensuring the quality of
terminology mappings.
Using Government Leverage To Establish National Standards
Given both the sizable purchasing power (over 40 percent of health care
expenditures) and the regulatory authority of the federal government,
the incorporation of data standards into government programs is a
logical approach to establishing national standards. After providing a
reasonable time period for health care organizations to comply with
national standards identified by CHI initiative, the major government
health care programs, including those operated or sponsored by
Department of Health and Human Services, the Veterans Administration,
and the Department of Defense, should immediately incorporate these data
standards into their contractual and regulatory requirements (e.g.,
Medicare conditions for participation).
The Data Standards for Patient Safety Committee detailed an action plan
for the deployment of standards for classifying and coding health data,
for electronically interchanging data, and representing clinical
knowledge. With federal leadership in the establishment of standards for
data that support patient safety, information technology systems built
over the coming decades should achieve the success to support the
delivery of safe and effective care that we have so long been waiting
for. Our committee report offers a blueprint to address the standards
necessary to make electronic health records universal not only within
the federal sector, but across the country as well.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the subcommittee for the
opportunity to testify. I would be happy to take questions at the
appropriate time.
|