Actively using registries offers the easiest, most effective and affordable pathway to documenting improved outcomes NOW rather than YEARS later once all the expense, disruption and insanity of the typcial EMR implentation wears off…

Middelsex IPA (Middleton, CT) used a disease registry to generate up to $9,000 (+/-) in P4P income per physician and the doctors NEVER touched a piece of IT (paper charts) and no one had an EMR. So, paper-based practices documenting improved care and getting paid for it. Is the idea to create digital practices or improve care at lower costs?

A 100-physician group in southern NJ used a disease registry to track improved outcomes with Diabetic patients from certain self-insured employers in their area. They then used that data to negotiate higher FMV payment schedules for diabetic care through the local employers/plans resulting in significant revenue improvement for the group.

ANYWAYS, there are LOTS of simple ways of helping physicians adopt HIT that don’t bankrupt the practice or require physicians to learn new ways of practicing medicine. I believe the market/VCs will reward those companies who focus on delivering simple, effective and affordable products creating improved outcomes today, and that those companies who stay focused on creating complex, expensive and disruptive tools will go away.

We have made an application on both these platforms, Trialx (http://trialx.org) to help provide patients personalized recommendations for clinical trials. Apps like these could drive users to adopt PHRs and also draw in some VC funding, hopefully !!

To me, it all comes back to industry creating/offering simple, effective and affordable applications/services that respect a physician’s ability to choose when, how and why they bring HIT into their practice.

Government doesn’t need to create “markets” or “business models” to sustain/drive HIT adoption. Physicians are not weary of technology or unaware of the value one has when reviewing relevant/accurate clinical data in a single view (if 35 FP doctors can buy Epic for their Group, then doctors will spend $), but the investment has to be worth their effort/money and so far industry has continously failed to deliver despite VERY effective marketing engines at the legacy EMR companies.

The pursuit of perfection (complex/$$$) often sacrifices the opportunity to improve care/lower costs now (simple/effective/cheap). During a time when all of us must watch every expense, perhaps it is time to rely upon tradtional American values of ingenuity, thrift and industry focusing on improving outcomes, reducing errors and getting physicians paid to help drive adoption.

Wow, too much coffee this morning!