The #EMR, #Ebola and #Bigdata - what Can We Learn

After all the hype and knee jerk politics and media I was delighted to read this piece Ebola US Patient Zero: lessons on misdiagnosis and effective use of electronic health records by Upadhyay,  Sittig and Singh (PDF file here)

A thoughtful piece that drilled in to the detail of events surrounding the arrival and subsequent consultations, admission and treatment of Thomas Eric Duncan

who sadly died on October 8 succumbing to the ravages of the Ebola virus

As the authors state

The mishandling of US Patient Zero is receiving widespread media attention highlighting failures in disaster management, infectious disease control, national security, and emergency department (ED) care.....also brought decision-making vulnerabilities in the era of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) into the public eye

Much of the commentary generated "fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the competence of our health care delivery system" and while there were problems I agree with the authors that this is a “teachable moment”  and a chance to identify the missed opportunities and key issues that we can learn from

The authors used the publicly available documents and testimony in their quest and it is important to note that they did not have access to the full record, the EMR used or indeed all the pieces of the puzzle and made up for this in some areas with educated guesses.

It is interesting to note that in the first visit to the ED the patient's temperature spiked to 103 degrees accompanied by pain described by the patient as 8/10 in severity.

This from a Malaria Study but typical of the Spike in Temperature found with this disease

He was diagnosed on initial discharge included sinusitis but "but that CT scans of “head and abdomen” ordered during the ED visit showed no evidence of sinusitis" and perhaps with more attention and importantly time made available to the clinical staff would offer them the opportunity to focus on the history and examination and less on high tech investigation. In many cases clinicians are forced into their use not by clinical practice but rather to meet the production pressures - as the authors put it

A host of system-related factors detract from optimal conditions for critical thinking in the ED, leading clinicians to lose situational awareness. These include production pressures, distractions, and inefficient processes

The upshot was a discharge and subsequent return days later at and even then:

even after the second ED visit which led to hospitalization, strict Ebola isolation precautions were not followed for 2 days, until the diagnosis was confirmed by the CDC

Offering a window into the events that is made so much easier with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight

The authors offer some learning opportunities that are worth highlighting

Top of the list in would be working with software developers to improve EHR usability

As this case illustrates, EHR-based clinical workflows often fail to optimize information sharing amongst various team members, leading to lapses in recognizing specific clinical findings that could aid in rapid and accurate diagnosis

As an interesting addition none of the systems (or incentives) have any form of feedback loop built in to allow clinicians to learn from their actions.

As for the process of information capture - we have lost site of the information that is relevant in the fog of billing and regulatory driven template driven charting.

Condition-specific charting templates, drop-down selection lists, and checkboxes developed in response to billing or quality reporting requirements potentially distort history-taking, examination, and their accurate and comprehensive recording.. Clinicians also tend to ignore template-generated notes in their review process; often the signal-to-noise ratio in these notes is low. EHRs can lead to less verbal exchange, which is all the more needed and more effective when dealing with complex tasks and communicating critical information 

Right on except to say this does not "potentially distort history-taking" - it does distort history-taking and
not "EHRs can lead to less verbal exchange" - EHRs do lead to less verbal exchanges

The data entry requirements place an enormous burden on our clinical professionals

who are tasked and measured not on clinical practice and the delivery of great care but on specific content of documentation that is mandated to capture clinical information in specific ways determined by the reimbursement, coding and regulatory system.

Other factors, such as heavy data entry requirements and frequent copy-and-paste from previous notes, detract from critical thinking during the diagnostic decision-making process... For EHRs to be most effective, they need to be able to automatically sort through patient data, identify the pertinent findings, and present them in an easy to understand manner. Computer algorithms could combine patient-specific information with the latest evidence-based clinical knowledge to help clinicians reach the correct diagnosis

This is the next frontier of Healthcare technology and in particular clinical documentation - we know we can sort through patient data, identify the pertinent findings - focused in these examples on quality of care and evidence based guidelines and we know computer algorithms can use patient specific information combined with evidence based knowledge to help

Technology can help but there are some fundamental flaws in the design and management of healthcare that are fed by the current incentives. Many initiatives attempting to improve patient safety and value-based purchasing but don't focus on accuracy and timeliness of diagnosis and in particular Outpatient reimbursement policies do not reward diagnostic decision-making, teamwork, or quality time spent with the patient in making a diagnosis.

What you incent is what you get and this needs to be changed as well.

Tracking #Ebola Effectively hindered thanks to #ICD10 (double) delay

This graphic

Offers a timely reminder that the US Government delayed a second time the implementation of ICD10 coding system that is used in the rest of the world

There is no code for Ebola in ICD9 - just a non-specific 078.89: Other specified diseases due to viruses which covers:

Disease Synonyms
Acute infectious lymphocytosis
Cervical myalgia, epidemic
Disease due to Alpharetrovirus
Disease due to Alphavirus
Disease due to Arenavirus
Disease due to Betaherpesvirinae
Disease due to Birnavirus
Disease due to Coronaviridae
Disease due to Filoviridae
Disease due to Lentivirus
Disease due to Lone star virus
Disease due to Nairovirus
Disease due to Orthobunyavirus
Disease due to Parvoviridae
Disease due to Pestivirus
Disease due to Polyomaviridae
Disease due to Respirovirus
Disease due to Rotavirus
Disease due to Spumavirus
Disease due to Togaviridae
Duvenhage virus disease
Ebola virus disease
Epidemic cervical myalgia
Infectious lymphocytosis
Lassa fever
Le Dantec virus disease
Marburg virus disease
Mokola virus disease
Non-arthropod-borne viral disease associated with AIDS
Parainfluenza
Pichinde virus disease
Tacaribe virus disease
Vesicular stomatitis Alagoas virus disease
Viral encephalomyelocarditis
Applies To
Epidemic cervical myalgia
Marburg disease

ICD-10 has one specific code for Ebola: A98.4 - Ebola Virus Disease
Clinical Information
A highly fatal, acute hemorrhagic fever, clinically very similar to marburg virus disease, caused by ebolavirus, first occurring in the sudan and adjacent northwestern (what was then) zaire.

Accurate tracking and reporting stop at the border of the United States

This is one of many examples of codes "missing" in ICD9 for conditions and care we are already delivering and dealing with

Integrating Clinical Documentation Improvement into the Doctors Workflow

We know doctors are under an ever increasing load may eventually break their backs..if nothing else its increasing the overall pain

In a recent study of physician attitudes toward clinical documentation technology and processes clinicians the majority of clinicians said they would be more responsive to Clinical Documentation Improvement (CDI) clarifications if they were delivered in real-time within their normal documentation workflow in the electronic health record (EHR). They report being "disrupted" by queries for additional information

after they’ve documented in a patient chart or worse, after the patient is discharged.  All believe that ICD-10 will make matters much worse

With #HealthIT a growing portion of how doctors do their jobs they want to be involved in technology decisions yet most were not involved in clinical documentation technology decisions for their organization. And timing is everything - going back to answer questions after you have left the patient or worse after the patient has left "the building".


So what is the difference between success and failure of a CDI program

As the study points out physicians’ growing dissatisfaction in being

saddled with processes that distract them from clinical care, while being excluded from the decision-making process of choosing things that impact them every day

Technology should be simple and work for physicians and the key to changing the experience is to eliminate rework

Rework in clinical documentation is the enemy of efficiency

As Brian Yeaman, MD CMIO for Norman Regional Health System puts it

Using things like CLU and applying that to the ICD-10 code book to help me refine that diagnosis or ask me whether it’s the left or right or an upper or lower extremity are tremendous because it has a significant impact on our bottom line, and it’s also a physician satisfier … and on the back side we are not getting so many coding queries

And Reid Conant, MD President and CEO of Conant and Associates says

“Now we can provide our physicians with tools to get real-time feedback to not only change that document, but also change their behavior for the next document. That’s what organizations are looking for, and frankly, that’s what the doctors are looking for.”

We can achieve ICD10 compliance without breaking the back of clinicians

Computer Assisted Physician Documentation

It was an exciting news day today with the announcement of a Strategic partnership between Nuance and 3M. Lots of coverage and keen interest from the press and healthcare industry as evidenced by the 290,000 search results in Google by 15:30 ET. While many of the news links were picking up 3M's Press Release and Nuance's Press Release it was the interview on HISTalk that provided a detailed look into the tremendous synergies between the two companies and excitement surrounding the concept of Computer-Assisted Physician Documentation. As John Lindekugel said

In a nutshell, we’re taking 3M’s industry-leading Clinical Documentation Improvement approach, which a lot of hospitals rely on today in their HIM and documentation improvement departments, and applying all the technology that Nuance brings and its industry-leading technology to deliver that content to the point of care, to the physician.

Replacing the manual time consuming and painful follow up process today with an automated tool that provides immediate feedback to the clinician at the point of care.....as one CMO put it "that's huge!".

For clinicians CAPD's immediate feedback adds up to

• More accurate and specific documentation that is more effective in assessing and communicating the patient's condition
• Reducing the burden of disruptive follow up questions and queries for Clinical Documentation Improvement (CDI) staff
• Improving the overall quality and detail of the Clinical document without excessive change in behavior or effort
• Achieving appropriate reimbursement with more accurate quality and detailed clinical reporting
• Ease the burden of the ICD10 transition

For any healthcare facility in the US CAPD means there are now automated tools to reduce the administrative burden on clinicians which will have a positive effect on clinician satisfaction and retention. More accurate information flowing through the clinical systems translates to accurate clinical risk and severity, reducing compliance risk and reducing administrative costs

All this will be on show at HIMSS next week in Orlando at 3M's Booth 3547 and Nuance's Booth 2744. If you will be at the show stop by and take a look. It will be a busy few days but there should be plenty of opportunities to talk to the folks involved in developing the solution and we are keen to get feedback from as wide arrange of stakeholders as possible.