Welcome to the NEW CHUG— your ultimate destination for cutting-edge insights and discussions at the intersection of healthcare and technology.

Our platform is dedicated to exploring the dynamic landscape of healthcare technology, empowering professionals, enthusiasts, and innovators alike with the knowledge and resources to navigate the rapidly evolving field.

From telemedicine revolutionizing patient care to the transformative potential of artificial intelligence in diagnostics, we delve into a myriad of topics shaping the future of healthcare delivery. Whether you’re a seasoned healthcare IT professional, an aspiring entrepreneur in the digital health space, or simply curious about the latest innovations, our curated content, expert interviews, and thought-provoking articles provide a comprehensive exploration of healthcare technology’s most pressing issues.

Join us as we navigate the forefront of innovation, driving forward the transformation of healthcare for a healthier, more connected world.

Have questions or suggestions? Please use the contact button below.

Notifications

Clear all

Clinical Visit Summaries - Location of Care

MU, CQR, PQRS, etc.

Last Post by Anonymous 1 second ago

4 Posts

3 Users

0 Reactions

51 Views

RSS

plittle

(@plittle)

Posts: 19

Eminent Member

Topic starter

So I wonder if anyone else is having this problem. We have a multispecialty practice with different locations of care. We are having trouble when we run Clinical visit summaries. Since patients may see several specialist or a family practice and specialist within our enterprise and the location of care is linked to the billing. The location of care is can be changed many times. When anyone creates the CSV without checking on that the location of care is set to their practice it will create a CSV which appears to be from another specialty. For instance, the patient has seen a general surgeon but also is a patient who is a patient of our internal medicine provider. The surgeon or a staff member creates the CSV but the location of care has been changed back to the internal medicine practice (or wasn't changed to the surgeons in the first place). Now the title on the CSV looks as if it has been sent from the internal medicine practice instead of the Surgeons. Anyone know if there is any talk of an enhancement which links the CSV to the provider of the encounter which would be more static than the location of care which seems to be in constant flux.

Posted : April 3, 2015 4:03 am

plittle

(@plittle)

Posts: 19

Eminent Member

Topic starter

I just thought of something else. If they are created under the wrong provider - how are they counted. Where are they linked to the office visit encounter or to the home location of care?

Posted : April 3, 2015 4:11 am

jryan

(@jryan)

Posts: 119

Estimable Member

GE told us this would be addressed with SPR 61649. We have the same issue and are on 9.8.7. We have nurses who float and cover other offices and so their "home" location of care is different than the practice they are working in and it is printing their home location of care vs the providers - even though they chose the correct location of care for the document. When I scroll down the cvs saved in the note, I see several entries for people who contributed to the document and shows the nurse with her "home" location of care and then the provider with theirs. We have struggled with CQR getting valid data but I think it is counting for the provider. I'd have to double check on a specific patient example. Also, be aware that "filed in error" results show on CVS and that also has an spr and scheduled for resolve in 9.9 from what I was told last.

Posted : April 3, 2015 7:11 am

bruins1986

(@bruins1986)

Posts: 233

Reputable Member

This is supposed to be fixed in 9.8.10 from what I heard from GE - it effects the CCDA TOC document as well. The fact that this is not a higher priority on their list is absurd (literally incorrect information for both the patient and, in the TOC's case, the receiving location may call the wrong practice with questions!) but it is what it is.

This has not counted against us in the CQR yet - the provider who was the authorizing user of the office visit the CVS was generated on is getting credit for it in our system.

I'll submit before I go off on the rest of the CCDA issues...

Thanks,

Mike

Posted : April 3, 2015 10:08 am

Share:

24 Forums
9,940 Topics
39.9 K Posts
0 Online
6,470 Members

Forum Icons: Forum contains no unread posts Forum contains unread posts

Topic Icons: Not Replied Replied Active Hot Sticky Unapproved Solved Private Closed

Powered by wpForo Powered by wpForo version 2.4.0