The first reporting year of The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, otherwise known as MACRA, is completed. This program was new for everyone in 2017 and required a great deal of work to understand and setup the program. Many practices thought the GE Centricity MIPS reporting tool, otherwise known as the CQR tool, was the only option available for reporting.
In a previous blog, I wrote about areas to consider when selecting a reporting method for MACRA. One of the topics discussed in this blog was using your EHR vendor as a reporting mechanism. While this method may work well for some, it may also create workflow challenges for your practice. There are other options available to you.
Don’t Change Your Workflow – Fine Tune It!
Often times, the biggest issue associated with implementing new programs is the amount of change that must happen within the organization. We believe that technology should work for your practice and not your practice working for the technology. If you already have a workflow in place that is working for your practice, you shouldn’t have to change it to capture the correct data for reporting purposes.
It is understandable that vendors need to ensure standards of implementation. However, are those standards really right for your practice? If not, why must you change your workflow or system to accommodate the vendor standards. Our approach to the MACRA implementation is to have a standard but allow it to be customized to fit into your current workflow and setup.
GE Centricity MIPS Reporting Tool (CQR)
Within the standard GE Centricity install, there is a reporting option that is available to your practice. This tool is called the Clinical Quality Reporting or CQR Tool. This is the GE Centricity MIPS reporting tool. There are several pros and cons to this tool.
- It is easily accessible to your practice from within the EHR
- Many practices are using this tool
- GE Centricity supports this product and method
- There are patient drill down reports available
- Often times does not reflect the actual work your practice is doing
- This is because your workflows or setup do not meet the requirements of the tool.
- The specifications are given to you for how the Clinical Quality Reporting tool captures information and you must change your workflow or setup to meet those requirements.
- The dashboards are not always simple and easy to read
- It is difficult to export data in a meaningful way to review with providers
Alternatives to The Clinical Quality Reporting (CQR) Tool
Many practices are under the impression that this is the only way to report and do not realize that there are other options available to them. The GE Centricty CQR tool may be the right option for you but it is always good to know that you have alternatives when necessary.
In the early stages of MIPS planning, we felt it was really important to leverage the work that practices were already doing and to expand on that, not force them to change it. We also wanted practices to have a good alternative to the standard GE Centricity MIPS reporting option.
We developed a close partnership with a Qualified Clinical Data Registry to submit data directly from the GE Centricity EMR to their registry. All of the data is flowing behind the scenes and the practice does not need to adjust their workflow or setup. This allows the practice to focus on what is important, the overall success of the practice and not the details of how the data is getting to the reporting tool. As with any product, there are pros and cons.
- No need to adjust your system to accommodate requirements
- Accurate clinical data that could also be combined with claims or other data when needed
- Such as data out of pathology system or from another system
- You control the information reported, not your vendor
- Access to industry experts in MACRA
- Dashboards that can easily be exported and sent to providers for review
- Patient Specific reports for reviewing key clinical information
- The ability to easily calculate your MIPS Score based on groups or individuals
- This method is a variation from the standard GE Centricity MIPS reporting Tool
- Reports are not located within the GE Centricity product
- Additional technical configuration is required for data to flow to registry
It is important the practices have options to fit their specific needs. One method of reporting may work well for one practice and may not meet the needs of another. MIPS is complicated enough so anything that can be done to simply the process is a win for everyone.