A bill introduced March 21 by Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) would exempt pathologists from participating in the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) incentive programs. The Health Information Technology Reform Act (H.R. 1309) would prevent pathologists from being eligible for “meaningful use” incentives but would also protect them from Medicare payment penalties—scheduled to begin in 2015—for not meeting the program’s criteria. The bill reflects long-standing concerns from pathologists that the meaningful use program for eligible professionals is focused almost entirely on office-based physicians and generally does not apply to their pathology practices. The bill also notes that most pathologists already use laboratory and pathology information systems to maintain patient information and exchange laboratory and pathology test data with EHRs and other systems. However, the “lack of alignment” between pathology practices and their existing information systems and the meaningful use regulations “make it nearly impossible” for pathologists to meet the programs’ requirements, according to the bill. “Through their role in appropriate test selection and personalized medicine, and with access to the patient’s electronic health record, pathologists can play a key role in furthering Congress’ goals of reducing costs and improving health care quality,” Price wrote in the bill. But pathologists […]
A bill introduced March 21 by Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) would exempt pathologists from participating in the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) incentive programs.
The Health Information Technology Reform Act (H.R. 1309) would prevent pathologists from being eligible for “meaningful use” incentives but would also protect them from Medicare payment penalties—scheduled to begin in 2015—for not meeting the program’s criteria.
The bill reflects long-standing concerns from pathologists that the meaningful use program for eligible professionals is focused almost entirely on office-based physicians and generally does not apply to their pathology practices. The bill also notes that most pathologists already use laboratory and pathology information systems to maintain patient information and exchange laboratory and pathology test data with EHRs and other systems.
However, the “lack of alignment” between pathology practices and their existing information systems and the meaningful use regulations “make it nearly impossible” for pathologists to meet the programs’ requirements, according to the bill.
“Through their role in appropriate test selection and personalized medicine, and with access to the patient’s electronic health record, pathologists can play a key role in furthering Congress’ goals of reducing costs and improving health care quality,” Price wrote in the bill.
But pathologists should not be subject to payment penalties under the EHR program for failing to meet standards that do not apply to their practices or their typical interactions with patients, according to the bill.
Comments to ONC
In a January letter to the Office of the National Coordinator’s Health IT Policy Committee commenting on recommendations for Stage 3 of the meaningful use program, the College of American Pathologists (CAP) criticized the advisory group for not addressing the issue of specialists more directly.
The HIT Policy Committee had sought comments on a slew of recommendations for the next phase of the incentive program. Those recommendations will be used to advise ONC and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS is responsible for meaningful use program rules.
“The CAP understands that CMS and ONC wrote MU rules largely to incent office-based providers, particularly primary care physicians and hospitals, to adopt certified EHRs,” the pathologists’ group wrote. “Therefore, it is not surprising that the majority of the Stage 1 and Stages 2 objectives are outside the scope of pathology practice. The draft Stage 3 recommendations perpetuate this practice. We are disappointed that the HITPC continues to fail to recognize important and fundamental differences among specialties.”
CAP also acknowledged that most pathologists automatically qualify for the significant hardship exemption under the meaningful use rules, which protect them from Medicare payment adjustments after the penalty phase kicks in. But the group said permanent relief—not temporary regulatory relief—was needed.
