NOSH ChartingSystem

A new open source health charting system for doctors.


Leave a comment

Forget Metrics for EHR adoption…INTEROPERABILITY is where we NEED to go, but has it left the station

A lot has been discussed about MACRA lately and the potential impact on physicians and the EHR marketplace.  The post-mortem analysis about the Meaningful Use legislation has primarily focused on the critique that there were too many metrics for physicians to manage to prove they were using the EHR’s in a meaningful way.  Although this is a reasonable conclusion, I would argue stepping back even further and seeing what was really the whole point of Meaningful Use in the first place to get a better assessment of the damage done.

The good intention, I believed, was to harness the technology of EHRs (by being digital, as opposed to paper), so that these EHR systems were to be able to talk to each other.  This is not a foreign concept as there are so many examples today of how digital has transformed the ability for data to go from one container to another (e-mail, websites, social media) and even now with single sign-on solutions, current technologies (RESTful APIs, HTTPS, oAUTH) makes data transfers relatively trivial and secure.

It is laughable to me now that we are nowhere near where we should be to get true interoperability given the existence of these well documented and proven technologies.  The framework of the current crop of EHR’s with the largest market share is not focused about interoperability, but it’s about a monolithic, siloed entity that does not care whether you practice in a hospital, outpatient clinic, mental health office, child abuse evaluation center, nursing home, dentist office, or a direct primary care office.  Never mind that these EHR’s has 95% of everything a health care provider doesn’t need to use or see and that he or she has to use extra mental capacity to filter all of it out just to make it work way that works for them.  Never mind that these EHR’s will still not have the ability to automatically get the most up-to-date information about the patient you are taking care of in front of you because there is a pretty good chance that this patient may have gone to a different clinic or hospital, added or deleted a medication, allergy, or diagnosis without your knowledge, and it has not been reconciled with your EHR.

Effectively, these EHR’s are just an expensive, digital form of paper except it doesn’t work any better than the old-fashioned paper.  At least with paper, you can organize your chart YOUR way.  At least with paper prescriptions, patients can provide a signed physician prescription to different pharmacies if they want to price shop.  No wonder most doctors are disgusted and frustrated.  Doctors and patients are now left to choose and use only a handful of non-useful tools now that the EHR marketplace has been decimated to only a few big players thanks to Meaningful Use.

What’s next?  In general, these few big EHR players aim to increase their profit and market share by doing the walled-garden, monolithic, sliloed approach to interoperability.  Think about it…it wouldn’t make any sense for them from a business standpoint to share a standard interface to talk to another big vendor EHR if they can do anything about it.  They will delay, delay, and delay to prevent interoperability from ever seeing the light of day.  In the meantime, they hope to convince hapless hospitals and clinics that they will benefit to having their product because everyone else in this city/county/state/nation uses their EHR so if you want to talk to them, you’d better use the same one as every one else…even if it costs an arm and a leg…even if it doesn’t work well for the doctors and patients.

In other words, the train we needed so desperately has left the station because we wasted time going the rabbit hole instead.  And it’s likely not to ever come back in the form we expected from several years ago.  So what is a doctor to do if they are forced to use an EHR they don’t like AND they don’t have any leverage to convince the EHR company to improve their product so that it works for them?  Stay tuned…


Leave a comment

NOSH-in-a-Box

Another year has come and gone and although it’s been quiet on these blog pages, I will say with absolute certainty that NOSH is not by any means quiet.  I’ll be making a variety of blog posts in the next few weeks about what NOSH has been doing under the radar, but first, I’m most happy to share that NOSH ChartingSystem is now going Vagrant!  Don’t worry – NOSH is not begging for anything and it’s not living in the streets.  Vagrant is the super cool technology that allows one to build a full-working virtual machine (a computer within a computer for the non-techies), customized to the needs of NOSH.  What that means to you is that NOSH can be installed on any machine (Windows, Mac, Linux, or even in the cloud such as DigitalOcean) as long as it’s constantly online.  The heart of Vagrant technology is the concept of Boxes and that’s where NOSH-in-a-Box got its name.

Because NOSH-in-a-Box makes it super easy for interested physicians or clinics to try and actually use it in a real-live environment, it will now be the recommended installation method going forward.  Since it is a virtual machine, it is sand boxed from the host computer operating system so it doesn’t mess with it in any way.  You can even port it to another machine quickly if your main machine dies and if you have made a backup of the virtual machine.

The current NOSH-in-a-Box and how to install it on your system is right here.   If you’re too excited to try, may I ask that you wait for a few more days?   As of right now, the installation program is using NOSH 1.84.  But in a few days, we’ll be moving to NOSH 2.0.  Yes..a jump to 2.0 means a whole new NOSH.  A NOSH that is mobile-optimized so you don’t have to squint your smartphone or table to use it.  And even though NOSH was already simple to use compared to most EHR’s, NOSH 2.0 is easier and faster than ever to use.  Go munch on that!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Leave a comment

More EHR Pet Peeves

I just can’t stand it…I just have to vent.  Because it happens nearly EVERY DAY!

I’m a clinician day in and day out and I have to see past lab reports generated by an Epic EHR which are faxed over to me.  Yes, in these modern times, we still have to get a fax; because as a small clinic, you just can’t afford to get Epic and to have CareEverywhere…so much for Meaningful Use and being in the year 2016!)

So, I’m looking for abnormal values and I see them.

But there’s a problem.

Epic highlights these values in a shaded color (I have no idea what color it’s supposed to be because it’s printed in black and white).

Then you fax this paper to another clinic and it gets even more pixelated to the point of illegibility.

And so all you know is that there’s something wrong but YOU CAN’T READ THE VALUE.

I have to take the extra time to call the clinic to get the numerical value and normal ranges, VERBALLY.

Really, in this day and age?

 

 


1 Comment

It’s Alive!

A concerned follower asks:

Is NOSH dead?

And here’s my reply:

More than being alive, here’s a preview of what’s to come with NOSH in this recent conversation with other physicians: Adrian Gropper, Michael Mascia, and Peter Elias.  We’re talking about “One True Record” #onetruerecord and where NOSH fits into a patient centered electronic health record.  And there’s going to be a mobile version that is in the works which is fully integrated into NOSH.  It’s really exciting and ground breaking stuff.

Lastly, I apologize for the radio silence…it’s hard to blog, code, see patients, run a clinic, and be a dad all at the same time.  But I’m certainly here and I’ll be posting more soon.

 


1 Comment

New Feature: Timelines

As an open-source project, NOSH gets inspiration from a variety of physician-led ideas.  Actually incorporating them in the ethos of keeping NOSH simple and easy to use is the fun part for me.  So one of the ideas that came out of the idea of having a visible timeline (similar to a Facebook page) for a patient is something that Dr. Rob Lamberts suggested in one of his blog posts on KevinMD.

So one of the new features on NOSH 1.84 that recently got pushed on GitHub has this timeline feature.  Using the Live Demo will give you the best experience for what that is like.  However, I’ll briefly go over what it does.

When you click on Timeline when you enter a patient’s chart, you’ll be instantly given a window that pulls in all the encounters, medications, immunizations, allergies, problem lists, medical history, surgical history, and test results in a linear timeline fashion.  The feature is both easy to use for those using a mouse or with touch devices using a swiping function.

When clicking on the timeline item, it will then take you directly to the encounter that generated this historical item, if there is one associated with it.  For most providers, having that timeline just visible (you can see it whenever you’re already charting an encounter or just perusing in the chart) with a click on the left hand side makes it easy for all providers to have this in a ready-access, and not overly inundating manner.  Of course it’s a start, but as an open-source project, there is always a way to improve on it.  Keep the suggestions going!

Below are the screenshots for this feature:

NOSHCapture NOSHCapture1 NOSHCapture2


1 Comment

Meaningful Use Stage 3 and Three Quarters

It is with regret that Meaningful Use legislation has barreled down the path of insanity.  As a primary care physician, I don’t see how 700+ pages of rules and proposals mean any bit of relevance to my clinical practice anymore.  As the attrition continues regarding eligible providers, it is leading primary care physicians towards the junction point of going off the grid entirely or being enslaved by horrible EHR’s forever.

I won’t bother giving a point-by-point critique of Meaningful Use Stage 3.  If you want to know the details, there are some well written posts by Dr. Hamlaka and Margalit Gur-Arie, if you want to amuse yourself, beseech the gods, or cry (I have experienced all three).

Instead, in this post, I’d like you to close your eyes and imagine being a physician-wizard-to-be, stepping on a train platform called Meaningful Use and walking towards Stage 3…all the while looking for a Stage 3 and three-quarters written on a piece of paper in your hand.

On the Stage 3 platform, you come across a gate that has a sign that lists the 10 commandments by Dr. Octo Barnett, written way back in 1970:

1. Thou shall know what you want to do
2. Thou shall construct modular systems – given chaotic nature of hospitals
3. Thou shall build a computer system that can evolve in a graceful fashion
4. Thou shall build a system that allows easy and rapid programming development and modification
5. Thou shall build a system that has consistently rapid response time and is easy for the non-computernik to use
6. Thou shall have duplicate hardware systems
7. Thou shall build and implement your system in a joint effort with real users in a real situation with real problems
8. Thou shall be concerned with realities of the cost and projected benefit of the computer system
9. Innovation in computer technology is not enough; there must be a commitment to the potentials of radical change in other aspects of healthcare delivery, particularly those having to do with organization and manpower utilization
10. Be optimistic about the future, supportive of good work that is being done, passionate in your commitment, but always guided by a fundamental skepticism.

Pondering at the sign, you can’t help but be annoyed by a parrot overhead cackling “Keep it simple, stupid!” over and over again.  Looking down, you see what you thought were train tracks, but is actually a cobblestone path.

Curious, you open the gate and climb off the platform.  You start walking down the rocky cobblestone path for a mile or so, when you stumble into a deep, dark forest.  You then come to a murky lake and pages and pages of what appears to be Meaningful Use legislation are found floating in the lake.  As you reach down to pick up one of the pages, a spindly hand grabs hold of your arm, pulling you face down into the lake.

Immediately, you feel like you’re suffocating from the murky water, unable to see what is pulling you deeper and deeper.  You continue to struggle, but it’s no use.  As your feet finally touch the bottom depths of the lake, the spindly hand lets go of your arm and you find yourself immersed in darkness and shadows.

You begin to see shapes of what appears to other physicians, ambling aimlessly in the dark water.  They are staring at computer screens like zombies, unable to look away to focus on you.  They mumble incomprehensible words but you can feel their anger, fear, and frustration in the way their muscles twitch on their face, uncontrollably.  You can sense they’ve been imprisoned in the lake for years and years.  They have forgotten how to heal.

Looking up, you somehow see all the pages still floating above you, and yet all the light never shines through around it.  Puzzled, you turn all around to see where there could have been a light that allowed you to see the pages.  You look down into the muddy bottom and you see a small sparkle of luminescence.  Shuffling your feet to push away some of the ground beneath you, the light gets brighter.  You shuffle more dirt away with your legs, but the weight of the water wears you out.  Fatigued, you drop down onto the barren lake bottom.  You try to keep your eyes open, staring at the light, hoping to never lose sight of it.  In desperation, you pound your fist into the dirt.  Suddenly, the dirt gives way and you fall into a blindingly bright cave chamber.   A torrent of water rushes all around you as you fall in, knocking you headlong into a rocky wall.  You pass out.

As you come to, you awake to find yourself in a brightly colored room.  Next to you is another physician holding a tablet.  The physician looks intently at you as you come to and asks how you’re feeling.  Before speaking, you notice that there is a serene calmness in the room.  Despite the presence of the tablet, the physician appears to be highly focused on you instead.  You notice that the physician is minimally entering information into the system either through voice recognition or performing 1 to 2 taps at most for any search query.  The physician rarely has to take his eyes off you during the interview and subsequent examination.  You peer over the physician, looking at the tablet.  You see a screen that appears to be very simple, clean, and uncluttered in its appearance.  The physician actually looks happy and smiles at you.  You ask where you are, and he responds, “You, my friend, are in my clinic for a head injury.  What you’re experiencing is Meaningful Use Stage 3 and three-quarters.”

“What does that mean?”

“It means, simply, that you’re seeing a physician being happy with using the latest technology tools in harmony with practicing medicine and treating their patients.  It can be done, but we must never forget that the ones using the tools ought to be the ones who design and refine the tool.  These tools are meaningless and harmful if we don’t know how to harness it and sculpt it to our needs.  To prevent that, we must never cede our needs and our knowledge to someone else who doesn’t really know what physicians do.  Technology engagement and keeping a constant eye on patient safety and improving patient care ultimately leads to real meaningful use.  It’s not rocket science.  It’s a very simple concept that adheres to Dr. Barnett’s 10 commandments and doesn’t require 700 pages to decipher it.”

“So, what do I do now?”

“Once you’ve recovered, go forth on your quest to be a great physician.  And when you see other physician-wizards-to-be as well as physician-zombies, tell them to look for Meaningful Use Stage 3 and three-quarters.  They will learn soon enough that Meaningful Use Stage 3 is an illusion, an unnecessary distraction, and a path towards destruction for all that is sacred in medicine.  The right path is the one not so easily seen, but is simple in all respects.”


1 Comment

So much money for so much nothing – dire straits for electronic health records

I’ve previously written about my experience with poorly designed electronic health records and how it negatively impacts provider happiness and patient safety.  Apparently, I’m not alone in my experiences and my sentiments about this subject.

First, we have a study that validates the concern that EHR’s waste time for doctors.  Imagine the impact for primary care physicians who are already crammed for time, seeing patients in short time intervals just to keep their overhead.

Then, we have Dr. Clem McDonald, one of the pioneering physician champions for EHR’s at the Regenstrief Institute in Indianapolis and the author for the study, lamenting how a 5-year, $27 billion Meaningful Use Incentives legislation to encourage EHR adoption by physicians was a disappointment and a tragedy.

The players on the Meaningful Use stage are now starting to walk away.  First exiting is CCHIT, the governing body that somehow gave us the great idea of thinking that EHR’s need to be certified on the condition that they be expensive and that doctors need to somehow prove that we can use an EHR in a “meaningful” way, never mind that doctors then forget how to talk to patients and only clicking check boxes and safety measures are ignored.

Then the numbers for those who have attested for Meaningful Use Stage 2, due at the end of this year, are absolutely dismal.  Just looking at the data up to September, 2014, we had a total of 333,454 eligible Medicare providers.  Of those, 80% (266,067) successfully attested for Stage 1.  And now (with the deadline for Stage 2 ending at the end of this year), we have less than 1% (2,282) who are successfully attested for Stage 2.  I feel bad for the folks that put all their efforts into Stage 1 and are now stuck. (99% of them)  So much for the incentive money.  So much for using EHR’s meaningfully.  Apparently doctors don’t know how to use an EHR correctly because we doctors just don’t understand how to use a system that is supposed to be used by doctors.  But we now have some really happy EHR companies that have their physicians captive to their expensive, unusable system.

To add insult to injury, even patients don’t even trust information stored in the EHR’s because of their concern for data security and privacy.

I also point to Exhibit A where I personally used a big vendor, multi-million dollar EHR recently (unfortunately the same as this one) and I noted that there was an erroneously entered diagnosis code after a lab interface attempted to duplicate an ICD-9 code, but incorrectly selected a different one instead.  I didn’t want this poor patient to be an example of where an EHR virtually gave them syphilis, so I diligently attempted to try to remove this ICD-9 code from her problem list and chart.  Alas, no matter how many different ways to outsmart this EHR (and with my hacking skills, no less), I was unable to do this.  I thought that since I was a practicing physician, I should have the privileges to be able to edit it.  I also incorrectly assumed that since an EHR ought to have auditing features, removing an ICD-9 code would be noted (in the case my action to remove it might be construed as erroneous, at best, and covering up something nefarious, at worst) anyways.  So in desperation, I contacted tech support.  I was told that it couldn’t be done once an ICD-9 code has been associated with an order.  But then I said, well, I tried to reorder it without the wrong ICD-9 code, and yet, the code still appears in the chart.  They said, that once it’s even on an order that was redacted, an ICD-9 code cannot be removed from the chart.

No wonder, patients can’t trust the information in an EHR, because shenanigans like this keep a doctor from keeping the chart as accurate as possible.  But for that poor tech support person, I suppose they figured out a way to remove it at my persistence.  Chart correction in this EHR apparently is such a difficult process that can only be achieved through tech support privileges, which appears to be higher than a physician user privilege.  What does that say about the role of physicians and their EHR’s if the EHR won’t let physician’s use their medical knowledge to enter data?

With these examples, what’s the point of using an EHR anymore?  As a physician, a patient, and a citizen, I can’t believe we spent so much money ($27 billion) on so much nothing.

Music video for Money for Nothing from Dire Straits

On the flip side of what appears to be dire straits for the EHR world, we have patients that reportedly yearn to be more proactive with their health through online technologies.  First, a 2-year study from the ONC, revealed that despite privacy and security concerns, patients prefer that their physicians use an electronic medical record instead of a paper and pen.  Regarding patient engagement, an online survey performed by an EHR software research company, Software Advice found that 60% of Latinos would be willing to access their medical records online so that they are able to track their diabetes-related health risks.  Furthermore, 54% of Latinos say they would be willing to log and send personal health information electronically at their doctor’s recommendation if they had the means necessary.  Lastly, regarding patient collaboration, we have a recent study from the University of Chicago, University of Massachusetts, and Geisinger Health Systems that show that patient medical record accuracy can be improved with systems that incorporate patient feedback.

We have physicians who are trying to marry unique practice models such as direct pay practices and EHR’s that aren’t constrained to Meaningful Use incentives, including EHR’s home-grown in these innovative practice models (like yours truly and Rob Lambert’s).

So how can we harness the patient and physician’s desires and frustrations to overcome the dysfunctional status quo of health IT and Meaningful Use?

Whatever the solution is, below are what I believe must be the fundamental guiding principles going forward:

  • Use of open and modern API standards (like FHIR) for the digital exchange of information.
  • Ease of use for the physician and patient (OMG, why the user experience for an EHR is everything!) so they can enter their data without disrupting their workflow.
  • The cost of entry must be low for patients AND physicians so that no one is excluded.
  • And for the sake of data privacy and security, the data must aim to be decentralized and not stored by one monopolistic entity.

This is a vision of a different kind of interoperability, where physicians and patients collaborate on a unified, modern, AND secure personal health record…that is not wholly owned by a third party entity, but primarily owned by one entity that is truly meaningful…the patient.