1 / 12

Eastern Massachusetts Healthcare Initiative Policy Work Group Session 2

Eastern Massachusetts Healthcare Initiative Policy Work Group Session 2. May 29, 2009. Agenda. Progress and Remaining Activities Resolution of Previous Issues New Questions and Issues Policy Framework Document Next Steps. Policy Group Work Session Plan. Policy Guiding Principles.

sumana
Download Presentation

Eastern Massachusetts Healthcare Initiative Policy Work Group Session 2

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Eastern Massachusetts Healthcare InitiativePolicy Work GroupSession 2 May 29, 2009

  2. Agenda • Progress and Remaining Activities • Resolution of Previous Issues • New Questions and Issues • Policy Framework Document • Next Steps

  3. Policy Group Work Session Plan

  4. Policy Guiding Principles • Technical • Open Standards • Federated Data Architecture • Flexibility and Agility • No Rip and Replace • Multiple Implementation Models • General • Decisions Based on Guiding Principles • Openness and Transparency • Patients’ Rights • Patient Access and Participation • Data Collection and Use Limitation • Privacy and Security Policy Compliance • Coordinated Decentralization • Broad Adoptability • Anticipation of Change

  5. Definitions • Participant: A Provider Organization, Payer Organization, or Other Organization that has directly entered into a Data Sharing Agreement with NEHEN, accesses Protected Health Information via NEHEN, and actively participates in the exchange of electronic healthcare data via NEHEN. • Sending Participant: A Participant engaged in sending clinical data to another Participant via NEHEN. • Receiving Participant: A Participant engaged in receiving clinical data from another Participant via NEHEN. • Sending User: A person who is associated with a NEHEN Participant and sends clinical data via that association. • Receiving User: A person who is associated with a NEHEN Participant and receives clinical data via that association.

  6. Policy Questions and Issues:Resolutions for Review • What is NEHEN’s responsibility as regards Participant compliance with data sharing agreements and policies? Assume compliance or audit for compliance? • Resolution: Create a "statement of compliance" and require a legal signatory of the Participant to sign on an annual basis. The statement should include the right to make unannounced audits regarding privacy at any time. • Should all disclosures be reported to a patient upon patient request, or just selected disclosures? • Resolution: Report on all disclosures based on available data. Provide capabilities for Participants to uselocal NEHEN audit logs in their disclosure reporting work flows. • What should be the baseline for privacy and security protection—meeting minimum legal requirements or developing/meeting community best practices? • Resolution: Meet minimum legal requirements. Review Participant practices, and consider common practices for “best practice” implementation.

  7. Policy Questions and Issues for Discussion:Responsibilities of the Exchange • Do we need to define the purpose of the exchange to address the issue of the Receiving Participant/User’s liability (e.g., lab results received by a physician other than the physician who ordered the test)? • Examples: • The intent of the exchange is to support “live care” • The intent of the exchange is to support “better care management” • Must NEHEN restrict participation in order to comply with legal requirements, including state laws? • Examples: • May individuals and organizations operating in/licensed in New England states other than Massachusetts be users of the clinical data exchange? Must NEHEN policies address requirements for those states (e.g., sensitive information requirements)? • Can an organization operating in/licensed in another state be made responsible for compliance with that state’s laws? • May an individual operating in/licensed in another state be a user of the exchange?

  8. Policy Questions and Issues for Discussion:Responsibilities of the Exchange • Are NEHEN and/or Participants responsible for : • Attempting to influence legislation? • Educating the public about the exchange of clinical data? • Informing users of the potential for increased liability due to increased availability of information? • Informing or training Users on appropriate use of the exchange?

  9. Policy Questions and Issues for Discussion:Responsibilities of Persons/Organizations Receiving Messages • Must a Receiving Participant/User view a message received from an external source? • Examples: • May a receiver “turn off” receipt of some or all messages? • May a receiver “reject” a message that has been appropriately addressed? • May a receiver discard a message without viewing it? • What are a Receiving Participant/User’s responsibilities for acknowledging a message? • Examples: • Notify the sender that the message was received. • Notify the sender that the message was delivered to its final destination. • Notify the sender that the message could not be delivered (i.e., “addressee unknown”) • Notify the sender that the message was addressed to the wrong recipient (i.e., “not me”) • Must a Receiving Participant/User retain a message received from an external source? • May a Receiving Participant/User specify preferences for how/when they receive messages regardless of message type (e.g., “as soon as available”, “bundled” at end of day)?

  10. Policy Questions and Issues for Discussion:Responsibilities of Persons/Organizations Sending Messages • May/must a Sending Participant/User include in a message information that was received from an external source (i.e., not originally collected by the sender)? • If so, should it be identified as having come from an external source? • Must a Sending Participant/User resolve ambiguous destinations for a Receiving User (e.g., a physician who practices in multiple organizations or physical locations) • May/must a Receiving User identify a “preferred address” for cases where the ambiguity is not resolved? • May a Sending Participant/User specify preferences for how and when messages will be delivered (e.g., specify urgency or method of delivery)?

  11. Policy Questions and Issues for Discussion:Provider Registration/Addressing • May a message be addressed to an organization rather than an individual (e.g., a clinic or a CHC)? • May a message be addressed to a Receiving Practitioner who is other than a licensed care provider? • May a message be addressed to a Receiving Participant who acts as an intermediary for practitioners (e.g., a vendor offering portal access)? • Must a Receiving Practitioner be affiliated with a Receiving Participant organization for the purpose of authentication, authorization, and routing? • Examples: • California pediatrician refers patients to Children’s and wishes to be “added” as a Children’s user. • MMS or a vendor wishes to offer portal access. • NEHEN wishes to make access available via the NEHEN Portal. • Must NEHEN or the Participant organization obtain a provider’s consent to register the provider in the community directory?

  12. Next Steps • Distribute update to Advisory Committee week of June 1 • Incorporate today’s decisions and redistribute draft for Policy Group review week of June 1 • Distribute draft document and summary presentation to EMHI members not represented on Policy Group week of June 1 or June 8

More Related