The HITECH Act ignited a fervor in the healthcare industry in the early 2010s. Part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (a.k.a. the HITECH Act) incentivizes the adoption and meaningful use of electronic health record (EHR) systems—and penalizes those who fail to do either. According to CMS, eligible providers could receive incentives up to $44,000 through Medicare and up to $63,750 through Medicaid. Conversely, eligible professionals who failed to implement an EMR and/or demonstrate meaningful use by 2015 faced a 1% reduction in payments, with that rate rising over time.

Well, 2015 hit. The deadline—at least for Stage 1—came and went. So, what happened? How did all those eligible professionals do with their mission? Before we examine the HITECH Act AD (after deadline), let me first calm all you PTs, OTs, and SLPs who are reading this: You did not miss any deadlines; you never needed to demonstrate meaningful use. Physical therapists, occupational therapists, and speech-language pathologists are not considered “eligible professionals” per the ARRA. Thus, you cannot earn the incentive associated with demonstrating meaningful use of an EMR—even if you implemented a system that has been certified for meaningful use—nor can you be penalized for failing to meet the requirements. You’re in the clear.

That’s not to say, however, that PTs, OTs, and SLPs won’t ever be considered eligible professionals or that the federal government won’t enact new legislation with more inclusive or intense mandates. That’s why it’s important that all medical professionals, regardless of eligibility, keep the HITECH Act on their radar. So, with that, here are three things to know about the HITECH Act AD (after deadline):

The Physical Therapists Guide to Contract Negotiation - Regular BannerThe Physical Therapists Guide to Contract Negotiation - Small Banner

1. As expected, EHR adoption has increased.

According to a Data Brief from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), EHR adoption certainly has increased since 2008. Beyond that expected trend, the ONC also identified the following:

  • By 2014, 76% of non-federal acute care hospitals had adopted a basic EHR system—an “eight-fold increase since 2008,” notes this National Law Review article.
  • EHR adoption rates have increased in every state.
  • 97% of hospitals have adopted a certified EHR, which makes the prospect of interoperability promising.

2. But healthcare IT hasn’t necessarily improved—and it might be the HITECH Act’s fault.

The author of this op-ed from the Brookings Institution argues that—in accordance with our capitalistic society—consumers choose products based on the problems they have. The products that best meet customer demands prevail: “no one pays for Excel to enter in a few random numbers. Customers buy it to do a specific kind of analysis with ease and speed. If it was very difficult to work with Excel or it did not have much functionality, then many potential customers would have stuck with their paper spreadsheets or would have purchased better alternative software.” The HITECH Act has disrupted this trend, though. As this EHR Intelligence article explains, “The EHRs and health IT products only need to meet minimum requirements to be certified by the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC) and become available on the healthcare marketplace.” So healthcare professionals shop the best and the worst together; and the HITECH Act and meaningful use requirements make them rush to select something—anything—in order to avoid penalties and gain incentives. Essentially, they’re adopting technology without truly determining what they need out of the product, and now they “have to manage EHR technology that has an excess of data entry requirements and lacks true interoperability.”

The Brookings Institution isn’t alone in its conclusions. According to an interview-based study by the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, EHRs developed per HITECH Act requirements have usability issues, do not properly support multidisciplinary teamwork, and are ineffective at incorporating quality measures into care delivery. (From this perspective, it’s a very good thing PTs, OTs, and SLPs were left out of this HITECH hullabaloo.) Researchers in the study echoed the Brookings Institution’s sentiments about increasing competition in the marketplace. Both also seemed hopeful that the shift to pay-for-performance will improve the current health IT landscape.

3. Demonstrating meaningful use doesn’t have all parties happy, either.

Currently, eligible professionals are in Stage 2 of the the three-stage meaningful use program. (As I said at the beginning of this post, the Stage 1 deadline, which focused on EHR adoption, has passed.) Now, per Stage 2 requirements, eligible professionals must “show that more than 5% of all their patients view, download, or transmit to a third party their health information during a 1-year reporting period. Providers also must demonstrate that more than 5% of their patients used the EHR's electronic messaging function to send the provider an email message,” explains MedPage Today. Physicians’ groups have argued, though, that those requirements are too challenging to meet, especially for specialists and surgeons, who might not have ongoing relationships with their patients, and for those with patients in rural areas that have poor Internet connectivity. In response to those concerns, CMS has suggested less stringent requirements via a new proposed rule, which has made physicians happy.

Patient advocates, on the other hand: not so much. In an April 13 statement, Debra Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families, called the proposed changes “a startling and unwelcome departure from the administration’s commitment to health transformation that produces higher value, more patient- and family-centered care.” She further argues that Triple Aim success depends on patients “being equal and engaged partners...of their health and their care.” Whether or not the suggested Stage 2 changes happen, eligible professionals will still need to up their ante come Stage 3, which proposes that 25% of patients view online, download, or transmit health information.

As you can see, the HITECH Act is not without its faults, and now that the industry is living in the post-deadline era, working its way through the meaningful use stages, it is finally able to start evolving in response to those faults. But that evolution will have to come through legislative reform rather than the free market, which means the process could be slow and riddled with red tape. There’s a general consensus, though, that the pay-for-performance switch should help fast-track change. Only time will tell.

  • Cloudy with a Chance of Reform: 5 Key Healthcare Forecasts for 2017 Image

    webinarJan 5, 2017

    Cloudy with a Chance of Reform: 5 Key Healthcare Forecasts for 2017

    Predicting the weather is tough—just ask any meteorologist who has called for sun on the day of a major downpour. Well, predicting the fate of the US healthcare system isn’t much easier—there’s a lot up in the air, after all. But, even without a healthcare equivalent of Doppler Radar, there are a few key trends that are sure to have a major impact on PTs, OTs, and SLPs in 2017 and beyond. And to keep your practice …

  • Common Questions from our Cloudy with a Chance of Reform Webinar Image

    articleFeb 13, 2017 | 13 min. read

    Common Questions from our Cloudy with a Chance of Reform Webinar

    In our first webinar of 2017 , WebPT’s co-founder and president, Heidi Jannenga, teamed up with CEO Nancy Ham to discuss the current and future healthcare trends that will impact PTs, OTs, and SLPs. (Missed it? No worries; you can view the complete recording here .) As always, we received quite a few questions during the presentation—way more than we could address live. So, we’ve put them all here, in one handy Q&A doc. Scroll through and …

  • What the New HCAHPS Proposal Means for the Future of Hospital-Based PT  Image

    articleAug 11, 2016 | 3 min. read

    What the New HCAHPS Proposal Means for the Future of Hospital-Based PT

    When a patient is in pain, that patient wants relief—fast. And even if the patient knows medication is only a temporary fix—and a potentially dangerous one, at that—he or she will probably still choose drugs over longer-lasting, less-instant treatment options like physical therapy. For healthcare providers beholden to payment structures that incentivize patient satisfaction, that preference presents a real pickle: give the patient what he or she wants—long-term consequences be damned—or risk lower satisfaction scores (and potentially …

  • Hot Out of the Oven: Highlights of the 2017 Final Rule for PTs, OTs, and SLPs Image

    articleNov 9, 2016 | 8 min. read

    Hot Out of the Oven: Highlights of the 2017 Final Rule for PTs, OTs, and SLPs

    Halloween may be over, but if you didn’t get your fill of scares, I’ve got the perfect activity for you: reading through 1,401 pages of pure Medicare gobbledygook. Screaming yet? (Or should I check back at around page 500?) I kid, of course; there’s no need for you to slog through this year’s extra meaty Final Rule —which details the Medicare fee schedule and other important Medicare regulatory and reimbursement changes for physical therapy, occupational therapy, and …

  • The Case for Specialized Software: Why Your Hospital EHR Hinders Patient Care and Increases Risk Image

    articleJul 28, 2016 | 6 min. read

    The Case for Specialized Software: Why Your Hospital EHR Hinders Patient Care and Increases Risk

    If you Google “hospital EHR,” you’ll initially receive an overwhelming number of search results for the EHR systems themselves—essentially, advertisements and promotions for their software. Wade through those results, though, and you’ll uncover a wealth of articles in which hospital practitioners complain about their technology and how it negatively impacts patient care. Search “private practice EHR,” and you’ll encounter the same thing. And these complaints are, by and large, voiced by physicians—the people for whom these systems …

  • Founder Letter: My Evaluation of the New PT and OT Eval Codes Image

    articleNov 3, 2016 | 5 min. read

    Founder Letter: My Evaluation of the New PT and OT Eval Codes

    Over the last several years, healthcare providers in general—and rehab therapists, specifically—have been hit with a seemingly constant barrage of regulatory requirements. And the vast majority of these initiatives—PQRS, functional limitation reporting, MPPR, ICD-10, and the like—have either: Had a direct negative impact on our payments, or Forced us to devote extra time to satisfying the criteria of the requirements—with zero compensation for that time. So, it should come as no surprise that the rehab therapy community …

  • CPT Update: Why the Valuation of the New PT and OT Eval Codes is Problematic Image

    articleJul 19, 2016 | 9 min. read

    CPT Update: Why the Valuation of the New PT and OT Eval Codes is Problematic

    The purpose of any type of reform is to drive change. And that’s certainly true when it comes to healthcare—and healthcare payment—reform. But, change often comes slowly—and in the wake of Medicare’s recently issued proposed physician fee schedule for 2017 , I have to wonder whether it’ll come too slowly for physical and occupational therapists. That’s because, while the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) voiced its support for replacing the existing CPT codes for physical …

  • To ACO or Not to ACO: The Efficacy Question Image

    articleMay 20, 2015 | 4 min. read

    To ACO or Not to ACO: The Efficacy Question

    Yesterday, I told you about accountable care organizations (ACO) and how they might affect your physical therapy practice . Just one of several alternative payment models , the ACO approach seems to foster better and more expedient care, lower costs, and greater emphasis on physical therapists’ role as care coordinators. But CMS has experienced high dropout rates with its Pioneer program, and Medicare has already gone through three iterations of its ACO model, including the recent release …

  • Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Reducing Readmissions Despite Earlier Discharges Image

    articleAug 18, 2016 | 4 min. read

    Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Reducing Readmissions Despite Earlier Discharges

    If healthcare reform had a tagline, it’d probably include the phrase, “more for less.” In other words, most reform efforts fall in line with the ubiquitous call for providers across the entire healthcare spectrum to deliver higher-quality care at a lower cost. This have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too approach to change places a heavy burden on the leaders responsible for ensuring their organizations live up to that lofty tagline—and that’s especially true for those leaders at the helm of large hospital …

Achieve greatness in practice with the ultimate EMR for PTs, OTs, and SLPs.