NHIN code-a-thon may change government attitude toward open source August 28, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in NHIN.Tags: Connect, NHIN
add a comment
August 27th, 2009
Posted by Dana Blankenhorn @ 8:09 am
of Health and Human Services will host its first “code-a-thon” dedicated to the National Health Information Network and its Connect software.
About 80 programmers, led by Apache developer (and Collabnet employee) Brian Behlendorf, will spend about four hours trying to stamp out bugs in the open source software gateway, which is based on National Health Information Network (NHIN) conventions.
Behlendorf’s presence is not ceremonial, as CollabNet runs the military’s forge.mil open source forge site.
The code-a-thon, and the resulting code, could be a great demonstration of the power of open source in dealing with big problems like health care. The participation of Behlendorf offers hope the open source movement will have a great success.
While open source code has won approval from the Obama Administration, the processes by which such code is developed have not fared as well.
While the Veterans Administration is still working with its open source VistA platform, for instance, it has placed a moratorium on accepting code from local VA facilities. Instead of developing VistA through a network of collaborators, open source IT advocate Fred Trotter writes, “it will be centrally developed by a single, controlling entity.”
The decision may improve security and manageability of the code base, but it’s also going to slow down development, and give one contract holder control of the software.
Whether Behlendorf and his code-a-thon can give U.S. CTO Aneesh Chopra a little open source religion may be an open question. As Virginia CTO Chopra outsourced development work to India under a master contract signed with Northrup-Grumman which has since become highly controversial.
Are open source projects that are centrally controlled by single vendors really open source projects, or are they proprietary projects using open source as a feature? That’s a question the Obama Administration needs to answer if it’s to get full value from open source.
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983. You can follow Dana on Twitter. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
CDC Readies Internet Barrage To Combat Swine Flu August 24, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in CDC, H1N1.Tags: CDC, H1N1
add a comment
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control uses a range of Internet services, including Twitter, YouTube, and even games, to help spread flu-protection messages.
By Mitch Wagner, InformationWeek
Aug. 24, 2009
URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=219401216
The Centers for Disease Control is preparing several electronic remedies to head off the spread of the H1N1 flu virus. The agency is planning to make use of Twitter, YouTube videos, and text messaging, as well as more traditional tools like e-mail blasts and Web pages. The goal is to saturate the Internet with information about how people can protect themselves against the flu.
The CDC is gearing up its efforts with the approach of autumn, and the flu season, and the possibility of a resurgence of the swine flu virus.
Central to the campaign is putting information on other Web sites, rather than requiring people to come to CDC.gov for information, said Janice Nall, director of the CDC’s e-health marketing division. "We’re trying to reach people where they are, not necessarily expecting them to come to us," she said. "All of our distribution is on channels that people are already using."
The agency has had some good experience with this approach, Nall said. H1N1 videos on CDC.gov have gotten about 100,000 page views, but the same videos on YouTube got 2.01 million views.
People look for videos on YouTube but not necessarily on the CDC.gov site. The videos are "nothing fancy," Nall said, some are just talking heads. "It’s not like they’re exciting, sexy videos," she said. "We’re just trying to get the content out in video format."
This philosophy of bringing information to places on the Internet where people are, rather than requiring people to come to CDC.gov, pervades the CDC’s electronic strategy. Other efforts include:
Widgets and content syndication: The CDC has built widgets that people can embed on their own Web pages, providing tips on H1N1 prevention. Schools are finding it useful to embed the widgets on their own sites, to inform their constituents. Likewise, automated syndication lets a Web site publisher include the latest H1N1 information on their Web site, in a style that conforms to the look of the site, without any further update once the syndication tools are installed.
Graphical buttons: The CDC is distributing graphical buttons reminding people to take basic health precautions, such as covering their mouths when they cough. People can embed the buttons on social networking sites, including MySpace and Facebook.
Twitter: The CDC has several Twitter feeds, with a total of 700,000 followers, for releasing health information. Popularity of the feeds increases exponentially during flu season.
E-mail: E-mail updates are available from the CDC via GovDelivery, a federal e-mail alert service. The agency has a federal employee mailing list for H1N1 alerts with more than 200,000 subscribers. It’s also building tools to send alerts out to all government e-mail list subscribers, a whopping 13 million addresses.
Texting: The CDC is piloting texting health alerts.
Blogger outreach: The agency is planning to hold Webinars targeted at independent bloggers, in the hopes that they’ll help get the information out when necessary. It’s targeting bloggers who focus on parenting issues–aka "Mommybloggers"–as well as those who focus on health issues.
Information on and links to all the CDC’s social media campaigns are available on an overview page at CDC.gov. Of the CDC’s e-health marketing group’s about 35 full-time staffers, three or four are working on social media.
Social media is especially important in cases of the H1N1 virus because it strikes young adults particularly hard compared with other flus, which are generally most dangerous to the very old and very young. Health officials say they need to get information to young adults in the channels that they use, such as social media.
The CDC is also dabbling with using games and virtual worlds to get information out. It has released a flu game into Whyville, a virtual world for tweens. Players can catch the "Why-Flu" by sneezing and talking in close proximity to avatars who haven’t been vaccinated. Whyville avatars who catch the electronic flu can’t talk. The game teaches good hygiene and health practices.
Grandparents often go on Whyville to spend time with their grandchildren so the game also exposes older people–another high-risk group–to the health information as well.
Open source can save your life August 24, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in open source.Tags: open source
add a comment
August 23rd, 2009
Quick, if your life depended on it, which health care information system would you rather your hospital used:
- A proprietary system developed by software engineers based on marketing input, bug reports and customer requests?
- An open source system developed by thousands of health care practitioners including doctors, nurses, pharmacists, techs and developers, tested and refined in hundred of hospitals?
Well?
A Vista that works.
Known as VistA (Veterans health Information Systems and Technology Architecture), it consists of over 20,000 programs that share an Electronic Health Record (EHR). While it was initially developed at the Veterans Administration Hospitals – America’s single largest health care system – the open source product is freely available.
What does the VA know?
The government can’t do anything right – except for the finest military in the world, the National Labs, the very popular Medicare program, DARPA, aviation safety, GPS, the original Internet and hundreds of other excellent agencies and programs – so how good can VA care be? Is “best” good enough?
According to a Fox News BusinessWeek magazine article:
The 154 hospitals and 875 clinics run by the Veterans Affairs Dept. have been ranked best-in-class by a number of independent groups on a broad range of measures, from chronic care to heart disease treatment to percentage of members who receive flu shots. It offers all the same services, and sometimes more, than private sector providers.
According to a Rand Corp. study, the VA system provides two-thirds of the care recommended by such standards bodies as the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality. Far from perfect, granted — but the nation’s private-sector hospitals provide only 50%.
And while studies show that 3% to 8% of the nation’s prescriptions are filled erroneously, the VA’s prescription accuracy rate is greater than 99.997%, a level most hospitals only dream about. That’s largely because the VA has by far the most advanced computerized medical-records system in the U.S.
And for the past six years the VA has outranked private-sector hospitals on patient satisfaction in an annual consumer survey conducted by the National Quality Research Center at the University of Michigan. This keeps happening despite the fact that the VA spends an average of $5,000 per patient, vs. the national average of $6,300.
One more kicker: vets are older and sicker than the general population, making this performance even more impressive. It wasn’t always so – my late father, a WWII vet and a doctor, wasn’t impressed in the ’80s – but during the Clinton administration the VA launched a successful effort to improve care using technology and common sense.
Spend less? Get more? No wonder health reform is controversial!
Errors can be hazardous to your health
Almost 200,000 people a year die of preventable hospital mistakes according to a recent report. That’s 4x the deaths of traffic accidents – too bad hospitals don’t have seat belts.
We don’t know the exact number because the American Medical Association and American Hospital Association spent $81 million lobbying against a national medical error reporting system. They said the system would drive medical errors underground: doctors “burying” their mistakes?
Shocking. I so-o-o trust the medical establishment.
The bigger picture
With the complexity of diagnosis and treatment, the many drug interactions, and the scarcity of good information on what works and what doesn’t, it is obvious that information technology can – and in the VA and some other countries has – lowered costs and improved care as the President says.
But in today’s system, the insurance companies make more money when they don’t pay for care. And it is the sickest among us who suffer the payment denials, since they need the most care.
Today insurance companies make their money cherry-picking the healthiest and denying the sickest. So centralized electronic health records are a weapon that can be turned against us at any time as proof of a “pre-existing condition” to deny reimbursement.
Requiring that insurance companies offer insurance to everyone who applies and eliminating the “pre-existing condition” excuse are crucial reforms. After all, “life” is a pre-existing condition that inevitably leads to death.
Given the results the VA has shown, a “public option” is a great way to push the insurance companies and for-profit hospital chains to improve care, reduce errors AND drive down costs.
The Storage Bits take
In a field as complex and fast-changing as health care a proprietary system would be hard-pressed to keep up with the needs of thousands of hospitals. Open source won’t be perfect either, but putting the resources close to the people using them just makes more sense.
We are rapidly approaching a day when there is enough storage capacity for each of us to store detailed health-related records. Not just doctor’s visits, but exercise details, diet, drinking and more.
When all Americans have access to non-emergency health care and aren’t penalized for pre-existing conditions that information will help all who care to live stronger, longer and healthier lives. At lower cost to society.
Comments welcome, of course. I wrote more about my father’s WWII experiences here. And I look forward to the day when American doctors and nurses can go back to doing what they signed up for: taking care of people in need.
Robin Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
UberOps to present at the 2009 CDC PHIN Conference in Atlanta August 21, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in CDC, PHIN.Tags: CDC, Pan Flu, PHIN
1 comment so far
The CDC Public Health Information Network (PHIN) is a national initiative to improve the capacity of public health to use and exchange information electronically by promoting the use of standards, defining functional and technical requirements.
PHIN strives to improve public health by enhancing research and practice through best practices related to efficient, effective, and interoperable public health information systems.
CDC’s role in PHIN is:
- Supporting the exchange of critical health information between all levels of public health and healthcare,
- Developing and promulgating requirements, standards, specifications, and an overall architecture in a collaborative, transparent, and dynamic way,
- Monitoring the capability of state and local health departments to exchange information,
- Advancing supportive policy,
- Providing technical assistance to state and local health departments, and
- Facilitating communication and information sharing within the PHIN community.
Information on Uber Operations team members presenting at the conference:
Implementing Two Interoperable PHINMS RnR Hubs to Support Laboratory Data Exchange
Open Source Data Integration Solutions for PHIN Based Architecture
Hope to see you there.
Broadband Stimulus and the Underserved August 21, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in Broadband, Health Care.Tags: Broadband
add a comment
Some areas most in need of broadband coverage don’t qualify as "underserved" under the rules of the broadband stimulus program
Christopher Vein, chief information officer of the city of San Francisco, has some inventive ways to bring high-speed Internet access to areas of the city barely reached by broadband. He’s marshaled donated PCs and equipment and tapped excess capacity on the city’s fiber-optic network to give inner-city residents a fast connection to the Web and bring state-of-the-art health care to a clinic in one of San Francisco’s least privileged neighborhoods. In many ways, Vein is just getting warmed up; he has even bigger plans.
But as outsize as his ambitions may be, Vein won’t be in line for one of the government’s grandest plans for bringing broadband into underserved parts of the country. At least for now, San Francisco is holding off on applying for a grant under the federal government’s $4.7 billion Broadband Technology Opportunities Program, designed to encourage broadband development around the country.
It’s not that Vein doesn’t want the money, or couldn’t put it to good use. But as written, the rules governing the grants are stacked against cities like San Francisco, even though urban areas are among the places least reached by broadband and most in need of efforts like the one under way.
"I don’t want to be seen as criticizing the Administration’s efforts on the broadband problem around the country," Vein says. "I applaud its efforts. But the rules are written in such a way that it’s difficult for a city like San Francisco to meet the requirements." An Aug. 14 deadline for applicants for the first wave of funds was extended by six days after technical glitches snagged the application process.
To qualify for funding, applicants need to prove they’re catering to an "underserved" area. Yet the National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA), which is overseeing the program, defines underserved as one where at least half of all households lack broadband, or where fewer than 40% of households subscribe to broadband, or a place where no service provider advertises broadband speeds of at least 3 megabits per second. In a densely populated city like San Francisco, where telecom providers like AT&T (T) and Comcast (CMCSA) widely advertise residential broadband all over the city, it’s hard to point to a place that technically meets the "underserved" definition.
Problem Goes Beyond Big Cities
Rather than apply for the first batch of grants, Vein is waiting for a later batch of funds in hopes that the rules will be changed by then. Vein is not alone in his beef with the government’s broadband program. Cities large and small are having a hard time meeting the application requirements from the NTIA. Many are delaying requests until changes can be made to the rules, says Joanne Hovis, a telecommunications consultant who sits on the board of directors of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers & Advisors (NATOA), an organization that represents chief information officers and chief technology officers in local governments. "It’s hard to see how any urban area can qualify for a grant, and that is unfortunate because the most serious needs for broadband access are in urban areas," Hovis says. "Some neighborhoods may indeed be served by commercial operators, but that doesn’t mean the service is affordable."
The problem isn’t limited to big cities. Take the case of Pulaski, Tenn., a small town of about 8,000 located some 70 miles south of Nashville. In 2007, the local power utility, Pulaski Electric, built its own fiber-optic network to serve homes and local businesses. The service, which has about 1,500 customers, is called Energize and offers 10 megabits per second plus TV and voice calling for $99 per month. Pulaski Electric CEO Wes Kelley says he’d like to expand the service to some 2,500 households in outlying rural communities.
But Pulaski runs afoul of the same "underserved" definition as San Francisco does. A patchwork of local phone, cable, and wireless companies offer varying levels of DSL and fixed wireless services, making it difficult to argue in a grant application that these areas are "underserved," Kelly says, even though some of them have no broadband service at all. "There’s a combination of hit-and-miss providers in these communities that made it too complicated, so we decided to sit out the first round and wait," Kelley says.
Monticello, Minn., a city of 12,000 located 41 miles northwest of Minneapolis, is building its own fiber-optic network, paid for by $26 million in voter-approved revenue bonds, that would link not only households in the city itself but another 4,000 people in nearby communities that are part of Monticello’s school district. There, too, a hodgepodge of services from telecom providers such as TDS Telecom (TDS) makes it difficult for the city to seek broadband stimulus money. "We thought we’d be able to use that money to extend our network to families who live outside the city whose children attend schools in the district, and put them all on an equal footing," says Jeff O’Neill, city administrator. "We were all disappointed when it became clear that we wouldn’t qualify."
Lobbying for a Change in Rules
Broadband advocates and city governments have started to lobby the NTIA for a change in the rules. A July 16 letter sent by such groups as NATOA, Consumer Union, and the Media & Democracy Coalition to NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling urged several changes to the rules, chief among them the strict requirement that areas targeted for grants meet the current "underserved" definition. "The definition has the effect of precluding any resident infrastructure program in an area where a minimal level of broadband, even first-generation DSL, is generally available," the letter says.
A spokeswoman for Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski said the FCC isn’t commenting on the broadband grant process. Mark Seifert, senior adviser to NTIA director Strickling, says potential applicants should nevertheless file an application and make the best case possible. He says a good way to make the case is for applicants to take surveys among the local population to see what kind of service is available. But the priority, he says, is for bringing broadband to places where it’s either not available at all or only marginally available. "We know that this program alone will not achieve the President’s goal of broadband for everyone," Seifert says. "We have limited dollars to invest, and we have a directive from Congress and the public record telling us to invest it in areas that are unserved or underserved."
Critics of the NTIA rules are also worried about a provision that allows incumbent telecom carriers to challenge grants in places where they can argue they already offer service. Seifert says that telecom carriers shouldn’t take their rights to challenge grant applications lightly. "If an incumbent wants to challenge an application, they will need to demonstrate their claims with data," he says. "We take this program very seriously and will not allow parties to game the system."
Hesseldahl is a reporter for BusinessWeek.com.
For Outsiders, Opening Doors to Health Care August 20, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in Education, Health Care, Obama.Tags: Education, Health Care, John Hopkins, Masters, Obama
1 comment so far
August 20, 2009
Health care may be a costly drag on the economy, but it’s still a great place to find a job.
Midcareer managers and other workers have been migrating to health care jobs for years, of course. Now, with the recession, the lure is even stronger. Hospitals, which employ more than four million people, added 135,000 jobs last year and 19,400 more in the first half of 2009, even as millions of American workers wound up unemployed.
“The demand for talented leaders in health care is only going to go up,” predicted Jane Groves, a senior vice president at Integrated Healthcare Strategies, an executive search and consulting firm in Kansas City, Mo. “All that demand can’t and shouldn’t be filled by people already working in health care.”
Frank Pinkowsky worked as a manager at DuPont for 24 years before taking a position as senior vice president for human resources at the Guthrie Clinic in Sayre, Pa. “Don’t underestimate the value of what you learned working for someone else,” he advised.
Colin Ward, a 37-year-old Baltimore hospital executive, also successfully switched careers, leaving ESPN after eight years of producing sports broadcasts. “I felt like I wanted to be contributing in some other way,” he said.
After 11 months of graduate classes in the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and a year as a paid apprentice at a Baltimore hospital, he had a master’s degree in health science and management.
Mr. Ward stayed at the hospital, Lifebridge Health, for three more years and in 2007 moved to his current post at the Greater Baltimore Medical Center in Towson, Md., as director of corporate strategy. Still a big sports fan, he produces Ravens football games for WBAL radio on weekends.
The Hopkins school, which also offers a three-year master’s of public health degree, is the largest of dozens of accredited graduate and undergraduate programs in hospital management. Many managers with experience in fields like human resources, finance and marketing find a welcome in health care, with a little studying up. Online courses, books, journals and professional magazines provide material.
The American College of Healthcare Executives, based in Chicago, offers several online pages of career tips, including a two-year-old salary summary at www.ache.org. The Association of University Programs in Health Administration also lists contact information for many schools at www.aupha.org.
“We just recently recruited a vice president for human resources from the supermarket industry,” said Mike A. Helm, a senior executive at Sutter Health, a hospital chain with 45,000 employees in Northern California. Sutter hires 20 to 30 executives a year.
Health care does, of course, have its own jargon and a host of complex challenges. Managers have to know how to deal with doctors, nurses and professional groups, as well as with regulators.
“There are tons and tons of regulations, and the burden is growing,” said Dr. Steven A. Wartman, president of the Association of Academic Health Centers, a nonprofit group whose members are both research and health sciences universities that include hospitals.
The Obama administration’s $19 billion 10-year campaign to promote electronic medical records opens another huge opportunity, said Dr. Blackford Middleton, a technology research expert at Partners Healthcare in Boston. An estimated 40,000 to 160,000 additional health information professionals could be needed, he said.
Dr. Middleton is helping to develop an executive education course at the nonprofit American Medical Informatics Association and a certificate course at the Harvard School of Public Health. online, and the National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health sponsors some informatics fellowships.
The industry trade association, known as Himss for the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, offers an array of online courses that can help technology workers move into health care. Last month, Himss established its eLearning Academy, which, it says, “offers round-the-clock, on-demand access,” allowing students to work at their own pace on subjects like clinician-focused use of information technology, I.T. customer service to the health care user, and health care I.T. strategic planning.
James Platts, 30, chose a more formal academic setting for his training in health care management and completed the joint master’s program in business and public health at the University of California, Berkeley. He now works on health-related projects in the San Francisco office of the Boston Consulting Group.
He came to Berkeley in 2006 from the White House, where he was a junior-level staff member at the National Economic Council for two years. A Harvard graduate in economics, he also put in two years at Nasdaq, studying financial and economic data.
“I thought it would be fun and interesting from a health care perspective to live in California for a few years,” Mr. Platts said, referring to California’s large-scale health care issues and solutions.
Graduates of the Berkeley program are hired at an “average salary somewhat over $100,000,” said Kristi Raube, director of the joint health management program there. Tuition has tripled since 2007, to $35,893 for California residents and $45,093 for out-of-state students pursuing the joint master’s degree.
“Of course, nobody knows what will happen with health reform,” Dr. Wartman noted. One possibility could be pressure to cut costs by freezing hiring and squeezing out management jobs at hospitals and health insurers.
But, he said, “there is a very strong push to cover more people, with a lot of implications for growth in the health care work force.” Other drivers of growth, Dr. Wartman said, include “the continued march of science and technology, as well as uninvited developments such as new diseases.”
Electronic Health Records and the 21st Century Health Care System August 20, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in Blumenthal.Tags: Blumenthal
add a comment
Electronic Health Records and the 21st Century Health Care System
A Message from Dr. David Blumenthal, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology
In my role as National Coordinator for Health IT, I have the privilege to be part of a transformative change in health care that will help to extend the benefits of health information technology (HIT) to all Americans. With the passage earlier this year of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, we have the tools to begin a major transformation in American health care made possible through the creation of a secure, interoperable nationwide health information network.
Of course, this system is not an end in itself. Rather, it will enable countless other improvements in the quality and efficiency of health care that will make Americans healthier and their economy stronger.
My personal belief in this transformation is not based on theory or conjecture. As a primary care physician for over 30 years, I spent the first twenty shuffling papers in search of missing studies and frequently hoping, during middle-of-the-night emergencies, that I knew enough about patients’ medical histories to make good decisions. All that changed when I began to have access to patients’ electronic medical records. It made me a much better doctor. I would never go back, and neither would the vast majority of American physicians who have made the leap into the electronic age.
In fact, it would be hard for any health professional today to escape the conclusion that the antiquated, paper-dominated system we now have in place isn’t working well for patients, creates added costs and inefficiencies, and isn’t sustainable. As we look at our nation’s annual health care expenditures of approximately $2.5 trillion, there are many ways our current
system fails both patients and providers. It is clear that change is necessary.
But how and why is nationwide electronic health information exchange so critical to achieving such change? Most importantly, because it provides the best opportunity for each patient to receive optimal care. The technology will make patients’ complete medical information securely and reliably available to health care providers where and when it is needed – when clinician and patient are together facing medical decisions that can make a lasting difference.
Better, faster, more reliable and efficient care also ultimately reduces system-wide costs by delivering results that help to avoid expensive or prolonged hospitalization from delayed or ineffective treatment, avert costly and sometimes fatal adverse events and unnecessary procedures, and can help to eliminate the onset of disease by better informed management of each patient’s health.
The goal of assuring an electronic health record for every American is daunting. We at the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) do not pretend otherwise. We know this will be hard for some clinicians and hospitals, and we stand ready to help with resources provided by the Congress and the Administration.
We also recognize that we cannot achieve the benefits of a nationwide health information system unless we can assure all Americans that their personal health information will remain private and secure when this system exists. Putting into place safeguards for the privacy and security of this information, when it is in electronic form, will be an ongoing priority that influences and guides all of our efforts.
In the days, weeks, and months ahead, we will be rolling out a number of pivotal initiatives called for under the HITECH Act. I urge you to join and support us as we lay the foundation for every American to benefit from an electronic health record, as part of a modernized, interconnected, and vastly improved system of care delivery. We at ONC will be making every effort to keep you updated and fully engaged in all the steps of this national journey.
Sincerely,
David Blumenthal, M.D., M.P.P.
National Coordinator for Health Information Technology
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
Sebelius Boosts Blumenthal’s Authority August 20, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in Blumenthal.Tags: Blumenthal
add a comment
HDM Breaking News, August 18, 2009
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has delegated administrative responsibility to the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology for most of the grant and loan funding sections of the HITECH Act within the economic stimulus law.
The action, detailed in a notice published Aug. 18 in the Federal Register, does not cover the Medicare/Medicaid incentive programs for meaningful use of electronic health records systems.
National Coordinator David Blumenthal, M.D., now has administrative authority for all but one part of Sections 3011 through 3017 of Subtitle B, “Incentives for the Use of Health Information Technology,” in the HITECH Act. The exception is Section 3012 (c) (5), under which the HHS secretary may provide financial support to health information technology regional extension centers. Blumenthal has administrative authority for other extension center activities under that section.
The affected sections under Sebelius’ delegation to Blumenthal cover:
3011: funding to strengthen the health I.T. infrastructure through development of standards, certification of EHRs, and development of best practices to support secure nationwide exchange of data;
3012: health I.T. technical implementation assistance including development of a research center and regional extension centers;
3013: state grants to promote health I.T.;
3014: grants to states and Indian tribes for loan programs to facilitate EHR adoption;
3015: demonstration programs to integrate I.T. into clinical education;
3016: Increasing use of I.T. professionals in health care; and
3017: analyzing the effectiveness of grant and loan programs.
The notice is available at gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
Interview with Vish Sankaran August 10, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in nationwide health information exchange, Nationwide Health Information Network, Vish Sankaran.Tags: FHA, Vish Sankaran
add a comment
Vish Sankaran
Program Director for the Federal Health Architecture, Health and Human Services Department

Photo: Gary Landsman
The Nationwide Health Information Network: Most people have at least heard of this idea, even if they don’t know it by name.
The Federal Health Architecture (FHA) — essentially, the effort to help agencies build the bridges that will let them connect their internal systems to NHIN — has received less fanfare, but that’s changing.
It is this middle territory that consumes Vish Sankaran. As director of the Health and Human Services Department’s FHA program, he spends his days working with people across government to make those bridges a reality. So far, seven agencies have demonstrated the first bridges, using the CONNECT application interface collaboratively defined by federal agencies and private-sector participants. Those demos began in the late fall and continue.
While this achievement admittedly took a lot of nitty-gritty technical finagling, Sankaran says the ultimate success of these efforts hinges more on the fact that health IT touches us all personally: “We all know someone who has applied for disability benefits; we know a wounded soldier; we know a kid with cancer. We all are connected to this, not just as a government technology initiative but also as patients. And the more we can communicate what we do in human terms and make people understand why we are doing it, I think this is going to gain more traction.”
FedTech Managing Editor Vanessa Jo Roberts talked with Sankaran about how the government’s effort to create outfacing network links is going and what agencies are doing to encourage broader use of electronic health records.
FedTech: To start off, can you talk a little bit about the cross-agency collaboration behind the CONNECT initiative and the drivers bringing so many agencies together?
Sankaran: There are three major drivers. First, consistent processes: Each time an agency needs to exchange data with another organization, it must create things from scratch.
Second, they want to reduce the amount of time and cost of creating a gateway for exchanging information. If each agency has to build this from scratch, the cost is going to be high. But if they share it, if they do it once and repurpose it across the agencies multiple times, the overall cost will be less. And at the same time, that also reduces the time to market. If there is one organization where they can provide feedback, where their voice is heard and where their needs are advanced, they are very encouraged to participate. That organization is FHA.
Third is the business need for federal agencies to exchange data with other entities to enhance services for citizens. Healthcare, as we know, is local; it is not just within the federal government. The Nationwide Health Information Network has to be something that can be used to communicate between federal agencies and also with state, local and tribal entities and with the private-sector entities.
Agencies see this collaboration more like risk mitigation and also something that is scalable at the national level. As an example, look at the Veterans Affairs Department and the Defense Department, which have facilities all around the country. From a cost and manageability perspective, it’s better to have a national strategy that will allow them to get information out to their partners in a consistent manner. They see CONNECT and NHIN as a way to communicate within the broader healthcare space.
FedTech: How does the Federal Health Architecture program relate to the Nationwide Health Information Network initiative?
Sankaran: The role of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT is to lead the public- and private-sector efforts to promote health IT interoperability throughout the United States. And the Nationwide Health Information Network is one of ONC’s major initiatives. It coordinates development of NHIN to join the different health information exchanges, the integrated delivery networks for Kaiser and Johns Hopkins and so on, the different pharmacy networks, the federal agencies, the labs, the providers, the payers and many other stakeholders.
To build something of that scale, a network of networks, you need to have a governance structure in place. You also need to build the trust fabric, the right set of policies and an operational infrastructure. But also, we need to define the standards and the specifications that each of them is going to use to build the solutions on each of their ends, so that once they have a standardized gateway of communicating out to the network they will have interoperable standardized information flowing between the different stakeholders.
The Nationwide Health Information Network is the initiative within the Office of the National Coordinator to define these specifications — the governance, the trust, the policies and the operations. FHA supports the ONC’s initiatives by bringing together federal agencies to ensure their participation in national activities such as NHIN.
Personal Biography
Became program director for the Federal Health Architecture in 2007
Began work in the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT in 2004, as a technical adviser in the Health and Human Services Department organization
Founded his own software services company
Was director of IT and product operations for healthcare applications services provider CareScience (since acquired by the Premier healthcare alliance)
Holds a bachelor’s degree in engineering from Bharathiar University in India
Under FHA, we have a consortium of over 20 federal agencies that all have health-related activities. In 2007, the ONC brought all the health leaders and the federal CIOs together and said, “OK, we are planning to move forward with NHIN. Do you want to be a proactive participant?” They all came under the Federal Health Architecture umbrella and said, “OK, FHA, you manage this for us. We will tell you what our requirements are.” And, at the national level, that’s how we moved forward.
FHA built the software for them once. Each agency started implementing it, and the agencies that have recently completed demonstrations are the three major federal healthcare providers — DOD, VA and the Indian Health Service — and the Social Security Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute and the National Disaster Medical System. NDMS is used by entities that are deployed during a disaster; they are really checking out CONNECT for the next hurricane season.
FedTech: How does the government effort compare with what other entities have been doing?
Sankaran: We have close to 15 private-sector entities that are at the table along with the federal agencies. Each of them participated in defining the specifications, and then each of them took those specifications and built software solutions that allowed them to connect to the nationwide network. All of them are equal participants, equal stakeholders at the table. Though we all come at this from a different angle, the public and private sectors both have a lot to gain from health data exchange on a national level.
I can’t overstate the importance of getting the private sector, states and local communities involved. Though the work of the federal government is important, it’s critical to note that healthcare is local, and the nation’s long-term success in health interoperability will hinge upon our ability to build this from the ground up.
Our goal must be to build NHIN participation community by community, state by state — a bottom up approach. This can be done by providing the required guidance and support that will help build these communities today in a manner that allows them to be connected nationally without rebuilding the community infrastructure in the coming years.
The federal government must take a leadership role in helping build out this infrastructure, and we must work hand in hand with other constituents to make sure that what we’re all building makes sense and will continue to meet our needs in the coming years.
FedTech: How are agencies going to help citizens be more efficient in gathering and using their own data so that they don’t have to keep re-entering it?
Sankaran: That is the goal: to improve the patient experience. Through this we can improve the quality of healthcare in this country — that is a driving factor for us — while at the same time reducing the cost and also increasing access to care. So those are three driving factors that we talk about. But from a policy side, there’s a lot more to be addressed.

Photo: Gary Landsman
“In any industry, you always have early adopters and others who wait to see what is going to happen. But now, more and more agencies are
stepping up to
really move this
forward.”
The main thing is to stimulate health record adoption. But just having electronic health records doesn’t mean they are interoperable, so we also have to stimulate interoperability, and we also need to make sure that we incentivize the use of EHRs to improve quality and efficiency of care.
FedTech: Was there anything unexpected that came about because of the CONNECT collaboration?
Sankaran: I think everyone believed in the power of collaboration. But collaboration has been more of a buzzword than a reality in most federal activities. The work we’ve achieved related to NHIN is a notable exception. Agencies came together in such a short timeframe and did something that is very tangible for their beneficiaries. As a few entities started demonstrating their capability, that gave encouragement to others who were waiting to see what was really going to happen.
In any industry, you always have early adopters and others who wait to see what is going to happen. But now, more and more agencies are stepping up to really move this forward.
FedTech: What challenges does FHA face in promoting NHIN participation?
Sankaran: One of the challenges for us is security. Whenever you talk about federal data, the government is required to follow FISMA, the Federal Information Security Management Act. In the federal government, we have FISMA, and the private sector is implementing HIPAA [the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act]. Now, the difference between the two is that FISMA has more security controls in it versus HIPAA. When you are trying to move data from a tight security domain to a less tight one, it is always a challenge.
FedTech: It restricts the information you might be able to release.
Sankaran: That’s correct. And then primarily the challenge is this: If you move data from a federal system, say at DOD, into a Google or Microsoft application in the private sector, that data is still considered federal data. And if it is considered federal data, then we are required to make sure that the receiving entity is implementing FISMA security controls.
Now, that is a challenge because it is expensive for a private-sector organization to implement all the security controls under FISMA. Consider a group medical practice being required to implement the security controls of a federal agency. It would be cost prohibitive.
FedTech: So is resolving this security dilemma the most crucial factor for success?
Sankaran: That is one of the most crucial ones from a federal perspective. But from a broader perspective, we also have to make sure there is value for the participants who are at the table — that is key with any adoption we do in the health IT space.
FedTech: What do you think are some best practices for making sure that agencies recognize the benefits?
Sankaran: I can put them into three buckets for you:
One: Focus on your citizens’ needs — on your beneficiary needs, if you are talking from an agency perspective. Whatever we do should be based on the citizens’ needs.
Let me give you an example. When the agencies began talking about the Connect project, the discussion was on whether we should explain this in so-called standards terms — do we need to implement this standard versus that standard — or should we talk in human terms, such as how this would help a wounded soldier or a disabled citizen. When we started focusing more on the citizens’ needs, it was much easier for us to explain the program to folks and for them to provide important feedback. So focusing on citizens’ needs is critical.
Two: Build practical solutions — solutions that organizations want and need. They will implement them. Don’t just think about building something because it’s cool and cutting edge. Build it because it serves the purpose.
Three: Look beyond your organization. More often than not, the challenges you face have been faced by other organizations. Learn from them and also actively participate and join collaborations because that can help you contain cost and speed your development process.
FedTech: Agencies are driven by their missions, and the missions are very distinct, even though the way to achieve them may not be. But that notion of distinct missions has sometimes prevented collaboration.
Sankaran: That’s correct. But the more we talk about this, bring it to everyone’s attention, we have successes that we can share with others.
FedTech: Do you think agencies are surprised to find how much more they have in common than not when it comes to making data exchanges on NHIN?
Sankaran: People have started realizing this more and more. Although there are minor differences, the foundational issues are pretty much the same from one agency to another.
FedTech: Agencies would not have to replace legacy systems. That’s the whole purpose, really — as much as possible, correct?
To learn more about the CONNECT kernel, go to connectopensource.org.
Sankaran: Yes. Rip and replace is not a solution for us. The CONNECT gateway allows systems of all types to share data through NHIN. Too much money and effort have been invested in these legacy systems and custom-developed systems used throughout the federal government. CONNECT was built with the flexibility to accommodate that.
FedTech: Do you think that there is a lot of awareness of your work and the effort to improve healthcare?
Sankaran: We are getting there. We had our first discussions at the end of 2007. We started the projects in March of 2008, and this March we began the demonstrations. Within the last 12 months, we did a lot of things; we built something that we can share with people. It’s no longer talk; it is something that people can touch and feel.
Once we announced the open-source website, www.connectopensource.org, in early April, within two weeks from the date of release it had 20,000 unique hits. That’s something that the federal government enabled, and we expect the industry to really pick it up and move it forward. We have close to 900 people registered for downloading the solution. The critical aspect to your question is how do you communicate this, and that’s one of the reasons that we have started communicating not on technology terms but on human terms.
FedTech: We talked a bit about cybersecurity, but what about personally identifiable information and the privacy side of the security picture?
Sankaran: The federal security strategy is very much focused on harmonizing FISMA and HIPAA. It’s important to note that NHIN does not involve a centralized database or any type of storage that can be hacked. It’s not a large system that is being built. Data will reside within the participating organizations, and it must be protected as it is transferred over the Internet from one organization to another. That still needs to be resolved — to make it operational and trustworthy for the participants.
FedTech: How are you going to overcome this challenge?
Sankaran: What we have done is form the Federal Security Strategy for Health Information Exchange. It’s a working group where we brought all the federal agencies together to really explore our options. This will require a lot more attention because unless this is resolved, we really can’t move into production.
The good news is that there’s a great deal of overlap between the regulations for the federal government and for the rest of the healthcare industry. It’s now a matter of determining how alignment of these regulations can create rules of engagement where the process is acceptable for all, affordable to implement and still protects citizens’ privacy.
FedTech: Obviously part of that challenge is directly tied to data sharing and the ability to integrate systems. When you look explicitly at technology, what are some technologies or ways to help expose data, so that many people can use it?
Sankaran: In healthcare today, we are talking about interoperability. But in another 15 years or so, it will be a given. Products that come to market such as electronic health records or patient health records will be interoperable. We won’t have to build these bridge solutions.
If you look at what CONNECT is doing today, it is a bridge solution. That means you have legacy systems, and what you are expecting to do is to share information for the betterment of your beneficiaries. CONNECT was built as a kind of gateway to allow organizations to communicate with the external world.
FedTech: How important is innovation as a factor in this effort’s success, and what are some ways that government IT can better capture and harness creative prowess around this specific type of project?
Sankaran: We are encouraging the agencies, and they are also stepping up in these areas and building the backend network components. Even though we collaborated on the CONNECT gateway, the agencies still have to build their own adapters to link from their existing systems into the gateway. Many agencies have started working with each other on this part of the effort, too.
For example DOD is reaching out to the Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center, one of its innovative R&D arms, to look at next-generation network adapters that could be used to connect to NHIN. So the best way to achieve innovations is simply to begin a two-way dialogue with organizations throughout the government and the private sector.
It’s about looking at all this and saying, “OK, this is something that we all — the industry, the private sector, the federal government, everyone — has to work toward collectively to achieve.” By working together, agencies will be exposed to new ideas constantly. And even when they have different stakeholders with different missions and might need to do some things slightly differently, at the same time they can borrow good ideas to get a better solution.
FedTech: So, whatever the best of breed that is out there?
Sankaran: Exactly. And that is a good thing that’s happening in the government: the not-invented-here syndrome is going away.
FedTech: Was there anything else you wanted to talk about before we wrap up?
Sankaran: Industry and others are excited that the federal agencies have come together to move the broader agenda forward. And as we move forward, one of the key things that I always remind my team and everyone else, including myself — I remind myself all the time — is that the policy should drive technology, not the other way around. So when we build this technology solution, it might be cool but if it doesn’t meet citizen needs and if it does not fully align with what the policy directions are, then it’s not going to go too far.
Source: FEDTECH
Blumenthal joins White House tech advisory council August 7, 2009
Posted by gonzalezloumiet in David Blumenthal, OSTP.Tags: David Blumenthal
add a comment
August 07, 2009 | Diana Manos, Senior Editor

David Blumenthal, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology
WASHINGTON – David Blumenthal, the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, has joined a new presidential advisory council on science and technology.
Blumenthal joined other key health reform leaders Thursday and Friday at the White House for the first meetings of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. PCAST is an advisory group of the nation’s leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the president to augment the science and technology advice he receives from inside the White House and from cabinet departments and other federal agencies.
According to the White House, PCAST will offer insights and in many cases make policy recommendations on science, technology and innovation relevant to the policy choices facing the Obama administration. PCAST is administered by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
According to PCAST Co-Chairman John Holdren, assistant to the president for science and technology and director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the group has "a spectacular cast of leaders of the science and technology community."
The 21 members include four winners of MacArthur "genius" awards, three Nobel laureates, two university presidents and 16 members of one or more of the U.S. national academies of science, engineering and medicine.
Along with Blumenthal, other council members include Aneesh Chopra, assistant to the president, associate director for technology and chief technology officer of the OSTP; and John Glaser, advisor to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.





