There's much being said about meaningful use as it relates to how health information is collected and shared.  The most reputable and knowledgeable people have been quick to let us know that there are too many proposals, wish lists, and even complaints going around that they just don’t know how meaningful use will be defined.  I agree completely, and besides one aspect of meaning use that has been made clear is that its definition will evolve over time.

As an IT support and solution provider I’m concerned about meaningful use from a standpoint of how the technology we recommend and implement will be able to satisfy security and connectivity requirements of the future.  Fortunately healthcare is not the first to cross the bridge of sharing personal information; banking and the payment card industry have already pioneered the technology.  The difficulties we face are related to the size each entity and complexity of information.  We work with partners like Cisco and Symantec who helped the banking industry cross this milestone and have been extremely active in heath care.  With a wheel that has already been invented, tested for years, technology that’s now affordable to small business, our partners, and our own experience the networking technology we deploy today will be able to satisfy meaningful use requirements for years to come.

Who should be very concerned about meaningful use?  Regional networks that are under development should be concerned since changes in meaningful use in the future can significantly change how their network is used, how the information is secured, and how the network is sustained.  Electronic Health Record (EHR) companies should be very concerned.  Changes in the requirements for sharing and securing the data maintained by the software they sell and support could have a dramatic impact on cost and support.  Imagine being forced to change database architecture, rapidly develop software with new features, and change how ALL of your customers and support staff interface with your EHR to satisfy changing security and meaningful use requirements.  If I were an EHR company I would be very concerned.

Physicians and practice managers should continue to monitor meaningful use requirements and participate in its predecessors active today such as PQRI, and electronic prescribing.  We should keep an open mind to using practice management and electronic records systems to improve existing paper workflows.  We should use existing technology that has been proven and will be adaptable to future requirements.  Most of all we should select and Electronic Health Record vendor that is financially healthy, has a large install base, and continually invests heavily in its own research and improvement.  Just like buying life insurance for your practice, the EHR needs to be there for the long run and add value in the end.  KLAS ratings are a good thing to consider, but dedication to improvement and fiscal viability are paramount. 

If you have these technologies and practices in place you are well on your way to satisfying any meaningful use requirements that might develop.   I better get back to more important things….2.