National Program of Cancer Registries Advancing E-cancer Reporting and Registry Operations (NPCR-AERRO): Activities Overview

Similar documents
NPCR-AERRO S PARTNERSHIP WITH IHE: ENSURING CANCER S CONNECTIVITY WITH THE EMR/EHR

Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) Structured Data Capture (SDC) Use Case: Cancer Registry Reporting

Rebooting Cancer Data Through Structured Data Capture GEMMA LEE NAACCR CONFERENCE JUNE, 2017

Electronic Health Records (EHR) HP Provider Relations October 2012

Council for Outbreak Response: Healthcare-Associated Infections & Antibiotic-Resistant Pathogens (CORHA) HICPAC December 1, 2016

The findings and conclusions in this presentation

Scenario Vendor Products Standards

CDC s Approach to Addressing the Opioid Overdose Epidemic

CMS EHR Incentive Program: Proposed Rules for Stage 2 and Stage 3 Meaningful Use Focus on Eligible Hospitals

NPCR s TNM Stage Calculator

HL7 s Version 2 standards and submission to immunization registries

Lessons Learned from Meaningful Use Implementation. Cynthia L. Bero, MPH Partners HealthCare May 19, 2011

Health IT and What IT Means

Medicare & Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs

Utility of an Early Case Capture Pediatric Cancer Registry

At the Intersection of Public Health and Health Care: CDC s National Asthma Control Program

Community and Healthcare Preparedness Tools

CDC Programmatic Activities in Breast and Ovarian Cancer Genomics

Electronic Support for Public Health Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS)

Stepwise Process for Improving the Quality of HIV-related POCT Sites Towards Certification

National Program of Cancer Registries Program Director s Meeting

CDC Strategies to Strengthen Public Health Emergency Management Programs

The State of Asthma. Jeanne Moorman, NCEH Survey Statistician National Asthma Program

The North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, Inc. (NAACCR) Interoperability Activities

2007 Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules

E-learning on Foodborne Illness Outbreak Environmental Assessments

Public Health Meaningful Use: Views from the Field. HIMSS HIE Roundtable May 19, 2011

Colorado EHR Incentive Program By the Numbers

Overview from the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control

Abstract. Introduction. Providers stand to lose $1.15 billion in CMS reimbursements under MU

American Society for Automation in Pharmacy January 25, 2013

Semantic Alignment between ICD-11 and SNOMED-CT. By Marcie Wright RHIA, CHDA, CCS

EHR Developer Code of Conduct Frequently Asked Questions

National Vaccine Plan Goal 4 Immunization Information Systems. Mike Garcia Scientific Technologies Corporation 24 July 2008

Mortality Slide Series. National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention

CDC and PHLIP. Genny Barkocy-Gallagher, Ph.D. CDC Infectious Diseases LIMS Coordinator. APHL Annual Meeting June 6, 2010

EHR Incentive Programs for Eligible Professionals: What You Need to Know for 2015 Tipsheet

Thyroid cancer in the United States: Recent increases

Current CDC Efforts Concerning Sodium Intake

PS : Comprehensive HIV Prevention Programs for Health Departments

ICD-10 Open Discussion

Enhanced Comprehensive HIV Prevention Planning (ECHPP) Project Overview

Message Mapping Guide (MMG) Development Update: Status of Work, Lessons Learned, and Enhancements

MIPS, Scoring and Submission Methods. David H. Smith, MBA HIT Project Manager

The Impact of E-Path Technology on the Ontario Cancer Registry. Operations

CDC Strategies for Protecting Older Americans

Utilizing syndromic surveillance data from ambulatory care settings in NYC

Collaborative Stage Transition Newsletter March 18, 2014

Final Meaningful Use Objectives for 2017

Final Meaningful Use Objectives for 2017

American Dental Education Association. Medicaid EHR Incentives Program

Proposed Changes to Meaningful Use 1, 2 and 3

Final Meaningful Use Objectives for Program Year 2018

Overview and Findings from ASTHO s IIS Interstate Data Sharing Meeting

Emerging Issues in Cancer Prevention and Control

National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network. October 5, 2011

Quality Improvement through HIT

MIPS Improvement Activities: Building Blocks for Value and Quality Care

SIM HIT Assessment. Table 1: Practice Capacity to Support Data Elements

Spend Plan: Setting up for FY 2015

Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs and Other State-Level Strategies

Complex just became comfortable.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Report: A CDC CJD Q&A

AUDITS, OPPORTUNITIES, & ROADMAPS

Data Sharing Consortiums and Large Datasets to Inform Cancer Diagnosis

Applying Joint Development Strategies to Meet Unique Community Needs: The Pacific Island Experience

Using Cancer Registry Data for Post Marketing Surveillance of Rare Cancers

Understanding Non-Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia and Other Lower Respiratory Infections Isaac See, MD November 7, 2013

Progress in Standardization of Reporting and Analysis of Data from Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) Programs

Patricia Ward Chief Budget Officer (919)

New York State Immunization Information System (NYSIIS) New York State Department of Health. Digital Government: Government to Business (G to B)

Christie Eheman, PhD NAACCR 6/2012

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS FOR STATE-BASED COMPREHENSIVE BREAST AND CERVICAL CANCER EARLY DETECTION PROGRAMS

@BWHiHub. How Harnessing the Power of Technology and Innovation can Improve Health Outcomes, Global Health and Health Systems

OC TOBER 19, Quality Payment Program Overview

CDC Division of Oral Health Federal Agency Panel

CMS-3311-P 100 TABLE 6: MEANINGFUL USES OBJECTIVES AND MEASURES FOR 2015 THROUGH 2017

Enhancing ereferral Capacity: A Strategy for Increasing Cessation among Priority Populations and Encouraging Health System Change

2012 EHR Donation Program ELIGIBILITY FORM

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Report: Prion Disease Activities at CDC

Scaling the National Diabetes Prevention Program

Influenza Vaccine Safety Monitoring Update

1. Improve Documentation Now

Final Meaningful Use Objectives for 2016

Emerging Select Agent Issues and Regulations

Disclosure. From the London Times... What Is Meaningful Use? 11/7/2011. Overview. The Road to Meaningful Use and Beyond

Lessons from Population-Based Surveillance for ASD

Linkage of Indiana State Cancer Registry and Indiana Network for Patient Care

Risk Classification Modeling to Combat Opioid Abuse

Health Reform, ACOs & Health Information Technology

Understanding the Dialysis Event Protocol and Avoiding Common Reporting Mistakes Alicia Shugart, MA

2018 IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE: WHAT S NEW IN STAGING FOR 2018?

NHSN Tips for CMS Hospital IQR Program: MRSA Bacteremia and CDI LabID Healthcare Personnel Influenza Vaccination

The Public Health Approach to Prevention Surveillance National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) Summary and access to data

Federal Partner Roundtable: CDC Updates

Medicaid Care Management: The Advanced Medical Home (AMH) Program OB Care Management (OBCM) Care Coordination for Children (CC4C) March 2018

The National Vaccine Advisory Committee: Reducing Patient and Provider Barriers to Maternal Immunizations

Integration of Oral Health Diagnostic Codes in Safety Net Dental Programs. October 25, 2011

MICHIGAN'S DENTAL REGISTRY:

Transcription:

National Program of Cancer Registries Advancing E-cancer Reporting and Registry Operations (NPCR-AERRO): Activities Overview Sandy Jones Public Health Advisor NAACCR 2011 Conference June 22, 2011 National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Division of Cancer Prevention and Control

National Program of Cancer Registries Advancing E-cancer Reporting and Registry Operations (NPCR-AERRO) CDC funded project to collaboratively develop an electronic reporting model for cancer surveillance recommendations, guidelines, and diagrams Promote the utilization of the EHR Increase electronic reporting and automated processing Standardize electronic data exchange

NPCR-AERRO Approach Modeling: Develop consensus best practice models for automating processes and electronic reporting Analysis and Design: Analyze current technology and infrastructure surrounding registry operations and develop products supporting automation and electronic reporting Implementation: Coordinate, lead, and support software vendors, hospitals, and state cancer registries pilot testing NPCR-AERRO models and products

EHR

Modeling and Analysis/Design Activities Hospital Operations - Complete Central Cancer Registry - Complete Cancer Control and Data Use Complete Clinic/Physician Office Under development

CLINIC/PHYSICIAN OFFICE

The Problem Traditional data collection for central cancer registries has been primarily from hospitals and anatomic pathology laboratories As medical advances have occurred, diagnosis and treatment of certain cancers has moved from the acute care setting to being fully cared for within the physician/clinic office. Because cancer registries have not traditionally required physicians to actively report cancer cases, under-reporting or a delay in reporting occurs. Incidence rates and research are adversely affected by the incomplete data collection.

The Solution Form Clinic/Physician Office (CPO) Workgroup within NPCR-AERRO project Develop methods and standards for electronic reporting from CPOs to cancer registries Develop an automated electronic process to identify and report cancer cases using the electronic medical record (EMR) Develop Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) profile based on workgroup output

Workgroup Formation September 2009: Invitations to NAACCR listserv and other professional organizations September 29, 2009: Kickoff meeting Over 90 responded, over 70 participated Over 25 Central Cancer Registries Other US federal government agencies: ASPE, NCI/SEER, other CDC branches Canadian government agencies Hospital registries, professional organizations, software vendors Twice monthly workgroup meetings Over 50 indicated interest in ongoing active participation

Workgroup Scope: Goal Goal: move cancer registry community forward in using consistent standards for electronic clinic/physician office reporting from EMR to improve completeness, timeliness, and quality of cancer registry data by: Implementing consistent electronic clinic/physician office reporting; Providing guidance to central cancer registries and clinics/physician offices for implementing electronic reporting; Providing central cancer registries with new and improved capabilities for utilizing clinic/physician office reports as a source of cancer information.

ELECTRONIC PATHOLOGY REPORTING

epath Activities Engaged a National Laboratory (LabCorp) to: use NAACCR Volume V establish appropriate methods for filtering out cancer case reports Using ICD-9/ICD-10 Code List or NAACCR Search Term List use Public Health Information Network Messaging System (PHINMS) for secure message transport Expanded state participation (in the last year) from 18 states to 39 states Expanded implementation to other national/regional laboratories (Bostwick, Quest, CBLPath, Caris Labs) Implemented Live epath reporting with: LabCorp to 28 state cancer registries Bostwick Laboratories to 26 state cancer registries CBL Path Laboratories to 7 state cancer registries

epath Activities Developed software for cancer registries to receive and process laboratory reports (emarc Plus) Integrated NAACCR Volume V specifications into laboratory information system (LIS) vendor software Developed an Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) Profile for Anatomic Pathology Reporting to Public Health based on NAACCR Volume V College of American Pathologists Cancer Protocols and Checklists (Synoptic Reports) Developing a standard for reporting of biomarker tests for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) activities that can be implemented on a broader scale in the future

epath Project Participants as of June 13, 2011 Washington D.C. Using PHINMS for Cancer Reporting (29 States) PHINMS installation for Cancer Reporting in Progress (5 States) Participation via sftp or other methods (3 States)

electronic Mapping, Reporting, and Coding (emarc) Plus Software Freely available tool developed by CDC NPCR Features: Multiple Database Support Interfaces with Public Health Information Network Messaging System (PHINMS) Receive and Process Data from Pathology Laboratory and Physician EMR Message Mapping to NAACCR Data Elements Filtering Auto-populates Abstract with Relevant Data Elements Auto-Coding of Histology, Primary Site, and Behavior Manual Review

epath Project Participants using emarc Plus as of June 13, 2011 Washington D.C. Currently use emarc Plus (17 States) Planning to Use emarc Plus (9 States)

INTEGRATING THE HEALTHCARE ENTERPRISE (IHE) AND MEANINGFUL USE

IHE: Background Initiative by healthcare professionals and industry to improve the way computer systems in healthcare share information Promotes the coordinated use of established standards (e.g., HL7, DICOM) IHE organizes demonstrations of IHE-compliant systems working in real-world clinical scenarios at medical meetings and other venues IHE profiles support health information networks worldwide, and have been accepted as requirements by the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services for federal procurement of healthcare IT systems

IHE: Process Users of healthcare information identify a need for information exchange and define the use case Technical and subject matter experts work together to develop detailed specifications ( profile ) to address the use case Profiles are vetted by community subject matter experts and then published for trial implementation Software vendors work with healthcare professionals to implement a profile in their software application Vendors and healthcare professionals perform tests and conduct demonstrations of the implemented profile

IHE: Cancer Profiles Anatomic Pathology Reporting to Public Health Cancer Registry (ARPH) Profile NAACCR Volume V used as baseline for text-based reports Uses HL7 v.2.5.1 ORU message format Profile for synoptic reporting will be developed Physician Reporting to a Public Health Repository Cancer Registry (PRPH-Ca) Profile Developed based on work from Clinic/Physician Office Workgroup activities Uses HL7 Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) format

Meaningful Use of Electronic Health Records Established by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 Simply put, meaningful use means providers need to show they're using certified EHR technology in ways that can be measured significantly in quality and in quantity. 1 Criteria for meaningful use will be staged in three steps over the course of five years: Stage 1 (2011 and 2012) sets the baseline for electronic data capture and information sharing Stages 2 and 3 will continue to expand on this baseline and be developed through future rule making Timeline under consideration for possible changes 1 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: https://www.cms.gov/ehrincentiveprograms/30_meaningful_use.asp#bookmark1

Meaningful Use Two regulations released Incentive Program for EHRs (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid) Final rule defines the minimum requirements for Clinical Quality Measures and MU Criteria that eligible providers and hospitals must meet through their use of certified EHRs Standards and Certification Criteria for EHRs (DHHS Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology) Final rule identifies the standards and certification criteria for the certification of EHR Two Federal Advisory Committees formed: HIT Policy Committee (Meaningful Use, Privacy & Security, etc.) HIT Standards Committee (Clinical Operations, Vocabulary, etc.)

Cancer and Meaningful Use Improve cancer surveillance, cancer prevention and control efforts, health care quality, and public health outcomes Improve timeliness of cancer surveillance information such that it can be used to impact patient care and clinical decision making Health Information Technology Policy Committee (HITPC) Proposed Stage 2 criterion: Eligible Provider: Submit reportable cancer conditions (attest to at least one) in accordance with applicable law and practice New objective for CMS consideration Signal to Health Information Technology Standards Committee: Possible use of IHE cancer reporting implementation guide

Meaningful Use: Why Cancer? Cancer community has a well-established SINGLE national data standard for case reporting that has been agreed upon and used by all state cancer registries for over fifteen years (NAACCR Vol. II) State Cancer Registries ready to receive and process data from physician offices by early 2012 or sooner emarc Plus, CDC-developed, freely available software, receives and processes CDA documents from EMRs Cancer reporting requirements are part of capture of information related to cancer diagnosis and treatment; fit in normal clinical workflow State Cancer Registries are CURRENTLY receiving electronic pathology reports (HL7 2.3.1 and 2.5.1)

Meaningful Use (MU) and Public Health MU provides important opportunity for public health to exchange data with hospitals and providers 3 public health criteria in Stage 1 Relevant to cancer community: electronic laboratory reporting requirement Clinical laboratories only; does not include pathology laboratories Uses ELR implementation guide as standard, which NAACCR Volume V is based on NPCR has requested inclusion of pathology laboratory reporting for future stages

HOSPITAL DISCHARGE DATA

Project Activities Worked with National Association of Health Data Organizations (NAHDO), NAACCR Discharge Data Workgroup, and state cancer registries to align the NAACCR standards with the state reporting system standards Formed a small workgroup including staff from NAHDO, CDC NPCR, state discharge and state cancer registries to brainstorm possible solutions resulting in improved data collection and use Initial gap analysis of key data elements in the core hospital discharge (HDD) and cancer registry data sets

Project Activities (con t) Developed spreadsheet to provide a comparison of data element definitions and the specified field lengths for both data formats Presented the results of gap analysis document with representatives from both data systems Developed recommendations document based on review/discussions Developed a document that examined the types of research questions that could be answered using combined databases to provide concrete examples of the value of linking Developing oint statements to CMS and National Uniform Billing Committee

NPCR-AERRO Website and CyberView NPCR-AERRO Website provides an update on all past and current projects NPCR-AERRO CyberView website provides: Model drill down capability Model Map and list of models for quick access to any level of detail Glossary of Terms and references used in the project http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/npcr/informatics/aerro/

Sandy Jones 770-488-5689 Sthames@cdc.gov Wendy Scharber Northrop Grumman Contractor wendy@registrywidgets.com Wendy Blumenthal 770-488-1131 Wblumenthal@cdc.gov Minal Agrawal Northrop Grumman Contractor Magrawal@cdc.gov Sanjeev Baral Northrop Grumman Contractor sbaral@cdc.gov For more information please contact Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30333 Telephone, 1-800-CDC-INFO (232-4636)/TTY: 1-888-232-6348 E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov Web: www.cdc.gov The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Division of Cancer Prevention and Control