Advancing Health Blog

From a strictly technical standpoint, establishing a data-sharing connection between Paramount, a health insurance company and its primary care physician practices could have been executed in a short period of time. The real challenge of interoperability, however, was determining the right data to share—an arduous task that required not just technical expertise but considerable input from subject matter experts. In this case, investing the time to get it right was the difference between generating yet another unused data report and designing a game-changing population health strategy.

For the case managers at South Country Health Alliance, a county-based health plan serving 12 Minnesota counties, locating members in transition was proving to be a stumbling block to facilitating care. Although hospitals were supposed to be notifying the health plan within 24 hours of a hospital admission, South Country data revealed they were not receiving notifications for as many as 20 percent of their members. Further, notifications they did receive often came through after the member was discharged—much too late for case managers to provide proactive care.

In the past few years, research studies have painted a grim picture of IT project implementations.  In 2012, a groundbreaking collaboration between McKinsey & Company and the University of Oxford [1] showed that large IT projects ran 45 percent over budget, 7 percent over time, and delivered 56 percent less value than predicted.

The first post in this series described how the question “Where is my member?” launched our journey into interoperability. Focusing in on the data most needed by our health plan customers, we targeted an automated alert system that notified care managers when their patients had been admitted, discharged or transferred in real-time within a hospital system.

IT leaders have been searching for ways to share health data ever since President George W. Bush led the charge for nationally integrated technology 14 years ago. [1] At odds with the task, from an IT perspective, was the sheer volume of information available to be exchanged. Lab results, X-rays, vital signs—the sea of data collected by health systems paralyzed interoperability efforts and stranded providers with fax machines as a primary means to share patient data. [2]

A client recently shared with me his bold technique for evaluating vendors. If the references are glowing, he said, his committee rules them out. It sounds counterintuitive on first pass. Why wouldn’t an organization seek out a vendor with perfect recommendations? 

The New York Times recently shined a spotlight on an out-of-control epidemic[1] costing the American health care system as much as $289 billion a year: medication nonadherence.

In the care management industry, we’re quite familiar with the widespread failure to take medications as prescribed.

Establishing a business oriented taxonomy to define data integration requirements

Population health management (PHM) continues to evolve as health plans accelerate implementation of advanced analytics, configurable care management systems and intelligent engagement solutions. The underlying foundation along with these system updates is increased data access. Clinical interoperability has long been a talking point in the industry and through its realization, organizations are finally beginning to benefit from integration between provider EMRs and health plans.

It's Not Just About the Product - It's Also About the Process and the People:  Laying the Foundation for Successful Implementations

Welcome to part two of our series on the top 12 strategies for a successful implementation! Today, we will take a look at the kick-off stage.

Here are four things to look for in a solution partner that will make a difference in your implementation.

It's Not Just About the Product - It's Also About the Process and the People:  Laying the Foundation for Successful Implementations

Today’s read takes a look at pre-implementation.

On average, large IT implementation projects run 45% over budget and 7% over time, while delivering 56% less value than predicted¹. To combat these statistics, keep the implementation process in mind as early as when you are deciding your criteria for a care management system. The success of an implementation hinges on the quality of the implementation team, so the vendor itself needs to be evaluated alongside the features of the platform.

Here are five things to look for in a solution partner that will make a difference in your implementation.