CCHIT Followup

This is the blog that was never meant to be.  Two times, now, I have lost the entire thing just before posting due to a quick trigger finger.  Ay yi yi.  I will fight the WWW Gods, though, and make it happen.

CCHIT Update #1: After my comments from the CCHIT meeting recently, one of our co-Chairs, Dr. Jeannie Marcus, sent me an interesting response correcting or updating some of my comments.  Although we disagree on one or two issues, her insight was helpful and interesting.

I asked if I could post her message here, and she graciously agreed.  She was worried that it might look like she’s attacking me and I assured her she’s not (not even close…I appreciate the feedback).

At this point, I promptly deleted her email message.  See how this blog entry is cursed?

With her help, we have reconstructed PART of the message here.  Some of the good points are missing (particularly ones I agree with), but it’s better than nothing.  Her original message is indented.

 


 

From: Chip Hart [mailto:chip@pcc.com]

Sent: July 20, 2009 1:06 AM
To: Eugenia Marcus
Subject: Re: CCHIT clarification

> The CCHIT data as I know it. This year they went from 9 workgroups to 16

> which accounts for so many more people involved. The increase in the

> workgroups reflect the increase in the scope of work.

That certainly makes sense.

> I personally recruited a whole bunch of people to apply the way I recruited

> you last year. Most of the people I recruited made it on to a workgroup.

From a pediatric perspective, I think it paid off. 
[Dr. Marcus was instrumental in getting me on the committee last year.]

> Bonnie told me that one third of each

> workgroup is experienced CCHIT people and 2/3 are new to CCHIT except

> Child Health where we have 2/3 returning.

I find that interesting!  I understand it's a tough entry this year - 
I heard some interesting stories from people within CCHIT about 
the political issues...no more than 3 from a vendor, etc

> I don’t know that the stimulus money created an

> increased interest.

Without asking, we'll never know...but *everyone* I know (except you)
told me they feel that way.  Sure - folks like BillZ and John Sutter
aren't there for the money, but all of the intense competition I heard
from other CCHIT folks sure seemed driven by it.  I even heard it from
the CCHIT folks themselves!

 

I hope you took note of my anti-anti-vendor comments.  I'm no fan of
NextGen (how can I be? :-)), but I think they belong at the table and
are no more self-protective than those other companies who aren't
software vendors.  Most of the organizations at CCHIT who aren't
software companies are SO MUCH BIGGER than all but 6-7 of the software
companies.  That drives me crazy.

> I just think there were more opportunities and

> people were beginning to appreciate the work being done.

I think the increased opportunities is an interesting point that I
hadn't considered...but I don't know how you can consider the stimulus
package anything but the primary motivator!

> I, for one, think that I am contributing to the health of all children

> (not just the patients I see one at a time) by helping define the

> functionality of EMRs that will guide the care of children.

Well, I'm with you on that.  There's no money in this for me or PCC,
that's for sure...but I want it done RIGHT.

 


 

Thank you for the candor, Dr. Marcus.

CCHIT Update #2, the folks over at histalkpractice.com have a fun interview with Dr. Christoph Diasio, PCC-client extraordinaire, where he addresses EHR (f)utility, certification, and more. It’s been making the rounds among AAP members.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply