I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
(modified or unmodified).
It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
Edmund
___________________
Edmund Billings MD
Chief Medical Officer
Medsphere
1917 Palomar Oaks Way
Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
760.692.3700 office
415.505.8953 cell
www.medsphere.com
"Transforming Healthcare through Open Source"
________________________________________
From: open-ehealth-collaborative@googlegroups.com [open-ehealth-collaborative@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of JSS [jsso...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:03 PM
To: Open eHealth Collaborative
Subject: HITECH certification
I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
(modified or unmodified).
It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
Jeff Soble
The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or may be covered under the Privacy Act, 5 USC 552(a), and/or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (PL 104-191) and its various implementing regulations and must be protected in accordance with those provisions.. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To contact our email administrator directly, send to an email message to helpd...@medsphere.com. Thank you.
By the way, I would be interested in suggestions from the group about
which organizations/agencies might be best suited to administer the
"thinner" EHR certification process we've outlined.
-Jeff
On Mar 17, 6:03 pm, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
> certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
> editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
> officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
> available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
> (modified or unmodified).
> It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
> HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
I heartily applaud the document you have put together. I have been an
advocate of the use of Usability, Interoperability and Affordability
as the criteria-domains for selection of EHR systems; but as far as
certification is concerned, I am in full agreement that "thin
certification" based on the ability to prove standards-based
interoperability should be the approach taken.
I had forwarded a link to Shahid Shah (http://www.healthcareguy.com/),
who has expressed an interest in serving on the newly-created HHS
"Health IT Standards Committee" which will be the body that decides on
certification criteria this year. He is very supportive of
interoperability as the main thrust of HIT, and sees the shortcomings
of the CCHIT approach as described so well in the paper.
Robert Rowley MD
Chief Medical Officer
Practice Fusion, Inc.
On Mar 17, 4:03 pm, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
> certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
> editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
> officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
> available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
> (modified or unmodified).
> It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
> HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
Great work! I'd like to see more focus on interoperability as that is
the barrier to overcome to promote innovation and adoption. I'm not
interested in the house, let alone, the features, if there's no power
or water infrastructure running to it (or even standardized).
Cameron Brackett
Director of R&D, Honeywell
On Mar 17, 6:03 pm, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
> certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
> editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
> officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
> available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
> (modified or unmodified).
> It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
> HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
Well, this is exactly right. Why would you force link devices/apps to
the data? It simply makes no sense...except to the incumbent device
makers! ; ) DCK
David C. Kibbe, MD MBA
Senior Advisor, American Academy of Family Physicians
Chair, ASTM International E31Technical Committee on Healthcare
Informatics
Principal, The Kibbe Group LLC
___________
919-960-5290 office
913-205-7968 mobile
___________
dki...@aafp.org
kibbeda...@mac.com
CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail message (including attachments, if any)
is confidential and is intended only for the addressee. Any
unauthorized use or disclosure is strictly prohibited. Disclosure of
this e-mail to anyone other than the intended addressee does not
constitute waiver of privilege. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify me immediately and delete this.
Thank you for your cooperation. This message has not been encrypted. Special arrangements can be made for encryption upon request.
On Mar 23, 2009, at 8:12 PM, Cameron Brackett wrote:
> Great work! I'd like to see more focus on interoperability as that is
> the barrier to overcome to promote innovation and adoption. I'm not
> interested in the house, let alone, the features, if there's no power
> or water infrastructure running to it (or even standardized).
> Cameron Brackett
> Director of R&D, Honeywell
> On Mar 17, 6:03 pm, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
>> certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help
>> with
>> editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
>> officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
>> available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
>> (modified or unmodified).
>> It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
>> HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
I would also suggest that the current AIG debacle is a timely
illustration of what can happen when entire industries become
dependent on dominant players that are "too big to fail". I think
there is a serious chance that CCHIT certification could push us in
the same direction in the HIT space.
-Jeff
On Mar 23, 6:12 pm, Cameron Brackett <Cameron.Brack...@honeywell.com>
wrote:
> Great work! I'd like to see more focus on interoperability as that is
> the barrier to overcome to promote innovation and adoption. I'm not
> interested in the house, let alone, the features, if there's no power
> or water infrastructure running to it (or even standardized).
> Cameron Brackett
> Director of R&D, Honeywell
> On Mar 17, 6:03 pm, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
> > certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
> > editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
> > officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
> > available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
> > (modified or unmodified).
> > It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
> > HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
The newly-formed HIT Standards Committee is the organization that will
decide the certificaiton criteria. (http://
www.healthindustrywashingtonwatch.com/2009/03/articles/other-hhs-deve...).
There was a very tiny window for nominations to this committee --
requests were posted on March 11, and nominations were to be done by
March 16, 2009. Regardless, we should keep an eye on this committee,
and engage them actively as they begin the process of deciding on what
sort of certification criteria should be put into place going forward.
Robert Rowley MD
Chief Medical Officer
Practice Fusion, Inc.
On Mar 18, 4:06 am, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> By the way, I would be interested in suggestions from the group about
> which organizations/agencies might be best suited to administer the
> "thinner" EHR certification process we've outlined.
> -Jeff
> On Mar 17, 6:03 pm, JSS <jsso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have uploaded a letter expressing opposition to the use of CCHIT
> > certification for the HITECH Act. David Kibbe provided major help with
> > editing. I am planning to send this to appropriate government
> > officials involved in this issue, and would like to make the material
> > available to anyone else who is interested in using it as well
> > (modified or unmodified).
> > It would be great to begin collating contact info on individuals in
> > HHS, Congress, etc. who would benefit from hearing this.
That is because the whole certification thing, like the
interoperability thing, is a scam designed to give the appearance of
fairness while the real goal is to further entrench the big
proprietary players with taxpayer money. Unfortunately, nearly
everyone has bought into this which will put us back 10-20 years. When
it doesn't work but they've collected billions they'll throw up their
hands and go 'Oh! you wanted THAT. Why didn't you say so? We'll need
more money for THAT.'
-- IV
P.S. All EMR software purchased with taxpayer money must be Affero
General Public Licensed.
On Mar 25, 9:27 am, Robert Rowley MD <rob...@practicefusion.com>
wrote:
> There was a very tiny window for nominations to this committee --
> requests were posted on March 11, and nominations were to be done by
> March 16, 2009.
