In the healthcare IT world, probably nothing has been more anticipated than the meaningful use rules. At last, they arrived on July 13, and I liken the magnitude of the 864-page document to that of an historic snowfall. As I write this column, people are still digging out.
I anticipate it will be months before doctors, hospitals, CIOs, associations and healthcare experts have a full grip on this regulation. And even as they come to understand it, it will be morphing yet again with the Stage 2 requirements to come.
So what is the good, the bad and the ugly? The good is definitely the added flexibility. Without a doubt, federal regulators heard the complaints from stakeholders to get rid of the "all-or-nothing" approach.
The bad? I would say it's the time constraint remaining for adopters of health IT to get their ducks in a row fast enough to get the maximum incentives. The rule was late, and the timing allowed by Congress on this entire process was already crunched. It seems unfair that even those who have hustled all along to prepare, may not have much time to reap full rewards.
The ugly in the meaningful use rule would depend on who you are. If you are a provider without IT yet, it's almost dizzying to take in all the standards, measures, data requirements and certification it will require for meaningful adoption. But, it could get even uglier if you decide to forego adoption. In 2017, penalties will be in place for non-adopters.
The ugly might also be the initial interruption of workflow while health IT is adopted.
For vendors, there is plenty of ugly. They have to design, test, quality-check and get certified the EHRs providers will need to get their bonuses – all within a very short time.
Thank goodness health IT isn't really a spaghetti western. I don't think anyone will die over this, though there might be times they wish this were all just a movie.
