What Would You Do Without MU?

I was wondering how CIOs would approach the implementation of EMRs if they had never heard the term Meaningful Use. The more I thought about the question, the more I felt it merited discussion. If I were a CIO, I would not let these outside regulatory influences dictate my strategic decision making. As a member of the executive team, my responsibility is two-fold; to facilitate and improve patient care, and to contribute to the business as an advisor, someone whose actions positively impact the bottom line.

Some CIOs have been forced to abdicate their responsibility and to approach EHR as order takers. Sometimes the CEO/CFO/COO creates a directive mandating EHR. That said, their guidance may end. In other, more problematic cases, it doesn’t, and they also supply the name of the EHR vendor that must be used. The worst reaction to this pressure is to not challenge the issue of whether your organization will attempt to meet Meaningful Use. The concept is much more novel than it may appear.

What if Meaningful Use didn’t exist? Many hospitals undertook EHR without any hint of the fact that MU was coming — coming with money, penalties, and constraints. Many completed the implementation only to learn that to meet MU they are not done, far from it. In fact, they have just begun modifying their implementations, and paying big time for those changes.

Those who started EHR early did so under the notion that their efforts were working in concert with an established set of business goals. This is the right way to operate. Remember, EHR is voluntary — really. By default, that makes meeting MU voluntary. There is no hidden directive that states all those who implement an EHR must meet MU. Not meeting it may subject your organization to penalties, and these should be factored into your ROI calculation.

Let’s assume you have, or are going to implement, an EHR system. For large providers, it is difficult to develop a business argument for not having EHR. Now assume that MU does not exist. We already have seen examples of how having MU impacts HIT strategy, how would not having to plan around MU impact your EHR and HIT strategy? What other projects would be at the top of your list? What initiatives could you own if you did not shuffle resources away from your preferred strategy simply to chase MU? Instead, would you be addressing patient and physician churn? Implementing managed services opportunities? Aligning workflows? Developing a social media platform?

There is nothing wrong with assessing what you would be doing to support your hospital if there were no Meaningful Use. You can and should undertake that assessment and calculate its ROI. Then, instead of having a lone MU ROI, you have something else against which to compare it.