The AHA makes multiple recommendations that are favorable to hospitals but not necessarily providers that make reasonable sense.
“Advance health IT by supporting the adoption of interoperable EHRs, promoting a more consistent use of IT standards and providing improved testing, certification, and transparency about vendor products.”
Bottom line is that all the billions of dollars spent on meaningful use to capture endless data points that have little value to the average practitioner, this has created significant burden to cause acute on chronic “burnout” leading to chronic dissatisfaction.
The money spent could have been used on a robust national database that would have been the basis for Electronic Health Records interoperability. This would have included a national computerized order system that ended the hours relearning multiple systems.
From an EHR provider point of view, these rules have squelched creativity, efficiency, and what should have been a positive clinical adjunct into minefield of clicks and workarounds. When one adds the various meaningful use rules to the EH R, it significantly damages the EH R usability experience. While the Electronic Medical Record with artificial intelligence will hopefully someday be looked at as an asset, the barrier that interoperability imposes has yet to be solved. Why?
Currently it is not in the interest of any EHR vendor to make their system interoperable. Why should they allow a small (quite inventive and easy to use) system work well with theirs? The large enterprise-level vendors have long suppressed interoperability efforts, while the smaller, creative ones, and have pushed for it. Such activity is not uncommon in the tech world. Roku was once a small company too, and look how they have impacted the cable companies. But interoperability suppression is in no way appropriate in health care.