Adeel Siddiqui MBBS, Presenter: Nothing to Disclose

Mehwish Shayaan MBBS, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Keith J. Dreyer DO, PhD, Abstract Co-Author: Medical Advisor, Agfa-Gevaert Group Medical Advisor, FUJIFILM Holdings Corporation Medical Advisor, General Electric Company Medical Advisor, McKesson Corporation Medical Advisor, AuntMinnie.com Medical Advisor, Microsoft Corporation Medical Advisor, Merge Healthcare Incorporated Medical Advisor, RCG HealthCare Consulting Medical Advisor, Siemens AG Medical Advisor, Hue AS Medical Advisor, Planar Systems, Inc Medical Advisor, Toshiba Corporation Medical Advisor, TeraRecon, Inc Medical Advisor, Pro Medicus Limited Medical Advisor, LifeIMAGE Medical Advisor, IBM Corporation Medical Advisor, Hewlett-Packard Company Medical Advisor, EMC Corp Medical Advisor, Phase Forward Incorporated Medical Advisor, Winchester Systems, Inc Medical Advisor, Dell Inc Medical Advisor, Carestream Health, Inc Medical Advisor, Amirsys, Inc Medical Advisor, Reed Elsevier Employee, Perceptics, LLC Board Member, Diagnostic Imaging Board Member, AuntMinnie.com Board Member, Imaging Economics Author, Springer Science+Business Media Deutschland GmbH Shareholder, Apple Inc Shareholder, Microsoft Corporation Shareholder, Intel Corporation Shareholder, Google Inc Shareholder, IBM Corporation Shareholder, Hewlett-Packard Company Shareholder, Dell Inc Shareholder, General Electric Company Shareholder, Nuance Communications, Inc

Radiology groups affiliated with an institution that already has a certified electronic health record (EHR), or groups that are single site with a single radiology information system (RIS) are in the best position to benefit from MU with little effort or cost. Small groups that have resisted upgrade cycles will never have a better time to upgrade. Groups that have completed upgrades recently or do not have a high Medicare population are the most vulnerable to excessive costs and “upgrade fatigue”.  A deep understanding of all the market forces involved is necessary in order to develop a tailored MU strategy.

Meaningful use (MU) is a government run program to accelerate the adoption of electronic health records in the United States. Individual radiologists can earn up to $44,000 if they comply with the regulations and up to a 3% penalty on billing if they ignore the program. However, the lack of specialty specific criteria, and availability of certified products has made people wary. When should a practice look to upgrade to MU? When should a practice avoid MU?

Specialists were initially not included in meaningful use. This was due to fear the program would exclude private clinics. That is why some of the measures do not fit nicely within radiologists’ workflow. The biggest problem radiologists (and all specialists) face in MU is that if they are excluded from an item, they still have to possess certified technology. "Possessing” technology does not mean installed or deployed. Clinical decision support requires some sort of automated process that can filter medical knowledge based on patient demographic or laboratory data. A thorough cost benefit analyses, that includes penalties is needed. The amount of Medicare billing of the enterprise should be a major deciding factor. If a group has to convey reports and images to many disparate hospital groups and clinics, the upgrade process may become too cumbersome.

There is a brief description of the program and how it applies to radiology. Specific measures problematic to radiology are clarified. Many factors should be considered in performing a cost-benefit analyses and developing a tailored MU strategy.

Siddiqui, A, Shayaan, M, Dreyer, K, The Pursuit of Meaningful Use.  Radiological Society of North America 2012 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, November 25 - November 30, 2012 ,Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2012/12035901.html