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

Core 7 Part B Patient Electronic Access

MU, CQR, PQRS, etc.

Last Post by Anonymous 1 second ago

10 Posts

6 Users

0 Reactions

61 Views

RSS

mmurone

(@mmurone)

Posts: 6

Active Member

Topic starter

In CQR.... calculations for the numerator for Part B of Core 7 we have low numerators for patients viewing and/or downloading their chart documents. Does anyone have any suggestions that you would be willing to share that worked for your practice? We are a specialist office (Otolaryngology).

Posted : March 31, 2015 9:22 am

hbias

(@hbias)

Posts: 83

Estimable Member

We have our staff who room the patient discuss the portal and let the patient know we will be sending them a summary of the visit. We have a portal signup how to card if they have not signed up we give them. Additionally, the staff says ' Dr XX would really like you to log on and review the data'. When it became more personal we got higher compliance. I tried to ask the doctors to talk to the patients but was not super successful and this option worked.

Posted : March 31, 2015 9:28 am

cecild

(@cecild)

Posts: 314

Reputable Member

If you have the Kryptiq portal in order to increment this counter the patient must view chart summary from the portal. hbias is correct that when the doctors ask them to review it helps. Also I sent out a mass mailing to portal users explaining they could view their records and latest information. I put a link that took them to the chart summary. This help as well. We did meet the requirement for last year.

Posted : March 31, 2015 10:44 am

jamesedward

(@jamesedward)

Posts: 257

Reputable Member

CQR thoughts on this measure:

1. Only Charts with Responsible Providers count. In a multi-specialty, single-Chart environment this is of no value since WH or Specialties could never pass MU. 2. CMS has published FAQs indicating that all providers in a Chart should get 'credit', so they should be able to pass the measure. One VDT for all. 3. On the 'enhanced' portal, people actually click. The above issues aside, 5% could be achievable. 4. We'll be adding a 'fake' Resp Provider onto Charts for those who don't have an in-house PCP just so they appear in the audit table. 5. My expectation is that this measure requires creating a custom report right from the tables OR unloading patients from CQR for every provider dashboard to an external database (ex: using Demographics for "Patients Seen" and #7 for VDT". If the PID on #7 matches to ANY provider who saw the patient, count it.). 6. Sure would be simpler if this worked like the other measures...

Posted : April 1, 2015 10:13 am

lkeith

(@lkeith)

Posts: 457

Honorable Member

James, when you say only charts that have a responsible provider will count, I'm wondering what version you are on. We are on CPS 12 and there is a Responsible Provider field as well as a PCP field. We were originally on CEMR which didn't have a separate PCP field so we were using the Responsible provider field to capture the PCP so at that time we had charts that may not have had a responsible provider. Our concern is that from what I was told last month by a GE support rep for SMPP is that the provider who is going to get credit is the provider in the Responsible provider field. Since we are a multi-specialty clinic and many of our patients see multiple providers, GE has to get that changed because all of the providers should get credit, not just the Responsible provider that is loaded in the Registration window for the patient.

Linda

Posted : April 2, 2015 7:09 am

lkeith

(@lkeith)

Posts: 457

Honorable Member

Cecild - I also meant to ask you how you did a mass message? We also have the Kryptiq patient portal, just went live last month, and I would be very interested in how you do the mass messages.

Thanks,

Linda

Posted : April 2, 2015 7:11 am

cecild

(@cecild)

Posts: 314

Reputable Member

Linda, on the web admin page go to newsletters. This is were I created the letter. This will send to your entire portal population. Cecil

Posted : April 2, 2015 7:45 am

jamesedward

(@jamesedward)

Posts: 257

Reputable Member

Lkieth,, my understanding is that Responsible Provider = Responsible Provider on the Registration screen, not the PCP field. We're on the Oracle version, EMR 9.8.7. Looking at the MUACTIVITY table with MUACTIVITYLOGTYPE IN (511, 512), every entry showing has RESPROVID. Kryptiq had stated it this way since last year, but I had really hoped for a subsequent change.

We have the same counting issue where people see multi-specialty offices or multi-providers within an office. (after all, that's how EMR is designed to work!).

Posted : April 2, 2015 10:47 am

jamesedward

(@jamesedward)

Posts: 257

Reputable Member

The tickets we had opened last year on this topic ended up as SPR 59062.

Posted : April 2, 2015 10:53 am

bruins1986

(@bruins1986)

Posts: 233

Reputable Member

Hi James,

I was curious about your issue so I ran a crystal report based on the "met" portal patients we have for one of our better performing providers and noticed that some of the "met" patients have blank responsible providers in registration. What CQR server are you on? I think we are gamma3 - I'm wondering if GEs logic is even the same on every server...

Thanks,

Mike

Posted : April 3, 2015 10:15 am

24 Forums
9,940 Topics
39.9 K Posts
1 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