Health Insights, London CHELSEA FOOTBALL CLUB 11 JUNE 2014 Outline • Introduction to HIMSS Analytics EMR Adoption Model • What are the benefits of using the acute care EMRAM? • What is next? The Continuity of Care Maturity Model History of the Acute Care EMRAM • The acute care EMRAM was developed in 2005 • Why the structure? – It is the typical manner by which hospitals rollout enterprise clinical systems • Are there any usual variations? – Academic Medical Centers often have CPOE live to enable education for the medical students and residents • The first Stage 7 validation occurred in Q4 2008 – Three years after EMRAM introduction Why Do We Do It? • Thought leadership – Quality, Safety, Efficiency improvements • To inform government policy – Numerous countries and regions use HIMSS Analytics to gather data for their policy formulation • To reflect the market – Where is the market heading • To “drive the market” • Hospital Data sets: – >5,400 US and >700 Canada – >8,000 Europe – >5,000 Asia-Pacific 2011 Q2 2014 Q1 Complete EMR, CCDA transactions; Data Analytics to Improve Care 1.1% 3.1% Physician documentation (structured templates), full CDSS, full R-PACS 4.0% 13.3% Closed Loop Medication Administration = Bar Code Enablement 6.1% 24.2% CPOE, or e-Prescribing, Clinical Decision Support (clinical protocols) 12.3% 15.7% Clinical documentation, CDSS (error checking) 46.3% 27.7% CDR, Controlled Medical Vocabulary, CDS, HIE capable 13.7% 7.2% Ancillaries - Lab, Rad, Pharmacy - All Installed 6.6% 3.2% All Three Ancillaries Not Installed 10.0% 5.6% N = 5439 N = 5449 Data from HIMSS Analytics® Database © 2012 HIMSS Analytics What Are the Benefits of Using the Acute Care EMRAM? SOME QUALITY, SAFETY & EFFICIENCY CORRELATIONS OF STAGE 7 HOSPITALS AND HEALTH SYSTEMS First, A Look at How US Market Has Changed Number of Beds in U.S. Hospitals Number of Hospitals in the U.S. 1,600,000 8,000 1,500,000 7,500 1,400,000 7,000 1,300,000 1,200,000 6,500 1,100,000 6,000 1,000,000 5,500 900,000 800,000 5,000 1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 The shift to outpatient care has dramatically reduced the number of hospitals and hospital beds – by 2013: <50% of hospitals are >150 beds Note: Sweden intends to reduce # hospitals by 20% in next decade Note: Estonia has >50% reduction in # hospitals in five years 2010 EMR Adoption in the U.S. Market Trended 2006 – 2013 Stage 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2014 Q1 Stage 7 0.00% 0.00% 0.30% 0.70% 1.00% 1.20% 1.80% Stage 6 0.10% 0.80% 0.50% 1.60% 3.20% 5.20% 7.30% 13.30% Stage 5 0.50% 1.40% 2.50% 3.80% 4.50% 8.40% 11.50% 24.20% Stage 4 3.10% 2.20% 2.50% 7.40% 10.50% 13.20% 14.00% 15.70% 3.10% Stage 3 18.70% 25.10% 35.70% 50.90% 49.00% 44.90% 41.70% 27.70% Stage 2 40.00% 37.20% 31.40% 16.90% 14.60% 12.40% 11.40% 7.20% Stage 1 17.40% 14.00% 11.50% 7.10% 5.70% 4.80% 3.20% Stage 0 20.40% 19.30% 15.60% 11.50% 10.10% 9.00% 7.50% 5.60% 7.20% # of Hospitals n = 4,237 n = 5,073 n = 5,166 n = 5,235 n = 5,281 N=5,337 N=5,310 N= 5,458 This is how long it takes to make “significant” national progress Data from HIMSS AnalyticsTM Database Stage 7 Studies on a Macro Scale Correlations With Stage 7 Status Representation of TJC Top Performing Hospitals by # Quality Metrics Excelling In, per EMRAM Stage All hospitals within each EMRAM Stage 50.0% 39.8% 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 20.7% 25.0% 16.3% 18.1% 30.1% 20.0% 12.9% 10.6% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 6.5% 6.2% 2.3% 0.4% 1.9% 0 12.8% 10.0% 6.4% 6.4% 1.7% 4.8% 10.1% 1 2 8.1% 4.2% 3 4 EMRAM Stage 3 or less 4 or more 6.5% 7.9% 9.7% 5 6 7 Source: HIMSS Analytics Representation of Hospitals with an "A" Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade by EMRAM Stage 100.0% All hospitals within each EMRAM Stage 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% Tipping Point 50.0% 40.0% 62.6% 30.0% 20.0% 30.8% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% Stage 0 5.9% Stage 1 12.8% 14.3% Stage 2 Stage 3 20.1% 21.8% Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 7 Value Based Purchasing (VBP) Clinical Scores 70.0 64.3 AVG Clinical Score 65.0 Tipping Point 60.0 55.0 Tipping Point 49.0 50.0 45.5 45.0 40.0 44.6 45.9 45.9 42.7 38.9 35.0 30.0 Stage 0 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 7 EMR Adoption Model Stage What About Cost Efficiency? Some Ground Breaking Research on the Effect of EMR Deployment What We Found in Researching • Hospitals that implemented EMR between 1996 and 2009 did NOT generally see a reduction in operating expense, EXCEPT: – Cost rise immediately during and following implementation and then fall back to previous levels • However: – Hospitals in locations with IT intensive industry found cost reductions after three years – Hospitals in other locations found costs increased – The initial cost increases was smaller for those in IT intensive locations Used by permission – Avi Goldfarb The Trillion Dollar Conundrum: Complementarities and Health Information Technology (NBER Working Paper No. 18281) Used by permission – Avi Goldfarb Used by permission – Avi Goldfarb Efficiencies Adjusted for • Case Mix Index = intensity • Quality scores, publically available • Readmission rate, publically available • Labor input, publically available – Nursing specifically • etc. …. Hospital Cost Efficiencies BY EMRAM Stage Early DRAFT Not for Distribution Used by permission – Eric Ford STATUS OF EMR ADOPTION EMR ADOPTION IN TURKEY, EUROPE AND THE US ... based on HIMSS Analytics EMR Adoption Model EMR Adoption Model Scores, Means per Country (data from 4/13 – 5/14 (Turkey), 4/12 – 3/14 (Europe), 4/13 – 3/14 (US), no weighting etc. applied) Turkey1 (143) 3.0 Europe2 (1,427) 2.2 Germany (383) 1.8 Netherlands (68) 4.0 USA3 (5,449) 0.0 4.1 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 EMRAM Score (Means) 6.0 7.0 1) Only public hospitals, of those 90% with >200 beds 2) Excl. Turkey; incl. Austria (42), Belgium (1), Denmark (16), Finland (3), France (17), Germany (383), Ireland (2), Italy (524), Netherlands (68), Norway (3), Poland (83), Portugal (29), Slovenia (2), Spain (220), Sweden (1), Switzerland (8), UK (25) 3) The EMRAM algorithm between Europe and the US differs in some degrees in order to reflect HIT implementation of that particular region Source: HIMSS Europe Database (05/2014) EMR ADOPTION IN TURKEY, EUROPE AND THE US ... based on HIMSS Analytics EMR Adoption Model EMR Adoption Model Scores, Means per Country (data from 4/13 – 5/14 (Turkey), 4/12 – 3/14 (Europe), 4/13 – 3/14 (US), no weighting etc. applied) Turkey (134) 3.0 Europe1 (659) 2.6 Germany (193) 2.3 Netherlands (63) 4.1 USA2 (1,310) 0.0 Only public and non-profit hospitals with >199 beds 5.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 EMRAM Score (Means) 6.0 7.0 1) Excl. Turkey; incl. Austria (14), Belgium (1), Denmark (15), Finland (3), France (16), Germany (193), Italy (178), Netherlands (63), Norway (3), Poland (55), Portugal (13), Slovenia (1), Spain (79), Sweden (1), Switzerland (4), UK (20) 2) The EMRAM algorithm between Europe and the US differs in some degrees in order to reflect HIT implementation of that particular region Source: HIMSS Europe Database (05/2014) So, What is Expected at Stage 7? Very Good Analytics Use Analytics to Find Care Issues to Address Use Analytics to Prove that IT Tools are Enabling Improvements Find Patients Who Could Benefit From BRCA1 and BRCA2 DNA Testing • Major University devised rules to search for child bearing age patients who have relatives with estrogen driven CA’s • Rule fired 1,355 times in October – Generated 22 referrals • Rule fired 1,478 time in November – Generated ~140 referrals in November Rules Firing vs. DNA Tests 1600 • This tells us several things: – A profound finding 1400 1200 1000 800 600 – Hard to “sell” DNA testing 400 200 0 1 2 October & November 2013 Predictive Alerting for Potential Readmissions • 40 key variable are tracked to generate predictive score • Alerts to physicians with advice on best practice – updated hourly ! Their Model is at 80% Accuracy Using I.T. Tools to Improve Patient Engagement Target Your Problems and Cohorts • Rural north central health system attacked CHF readmission rate – Weight gain due to medication insufficiency or behavior factors, is a strong predictor of readmission • Gave away blue-tooth enabled weight scales to targeted CHF patients – Reduced readmissions by -42% over 12 months Target Your Problems and Cohorts • Teenage obesity & Fit Bits.. Create competitive cohorts with PHR – -11% reduction in obesity in a year Mature Organizations Have Created an e-Continuum of Care And Have Reduced Costs per Person per Year Introducing The Continuity of Care Maturity Model Model Audiences • Global applicability • Primary Target Audiences: – Regional & National Health Authorities/ MoH – Integrated Delivery Networks (IDN) – Health Management Organizations (HMOs) / Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) – (Private) care chains THANK YOU John P Hoyt jhoyt@himss.org