|
|
October 30, 2006
A festive atmosphere and a record number of exhibitors and attendees made the 78th annual AHIMA Conference and Exhibition in Denver a rousing success for the profession’s leading organization and its members. The exhibit floor played to packed crowds—amazing what a free lunch will do—while educational sessions were met with enthusiasm. Some of the most intriguing happenings took place at the annual meeting of the House of Delegates, which voted on several items, including the controversial open membership question. In that vote, the House approved an amendment change by a 143-70 margin that eliminates the associate membership category and defines active members as “individuals interested in the AHIMA purpose and willing to abide by the Code of Ethics.” The change removes the requirement that active members hold an AHIMA certification in good standing. It also requires that the majority of board of director members are AHIMA-approved credential holders. “This decision by the House of Delegates will result in a stronger future for AHIMA by extending our influence over the entire HIM field—with and without credentials,” said AHIMA president Jill Callahan Dennis, JD, RHIA. “We'll work together to ensure that we accrue the benefits we're seeking with this change—a stronger voice speaking for HIM principles, a broadening of the HIM domain to encompass the new HIM-related roles that are developing as we move to a digital world, and more recognition of and value placed upon our credentials as they become more widely known. “We also have already begun working on possible pathways to offer our credentials to new kinds of individuals who are entering HIM-related positions from other fields. Watch for more on that from AHIMA's Council on Certification as those plans come together,” sje continued. “As we move forward,” Callahan Dennis said, “we will work together to craft the best methods of accruing all of these benefits. Members' involvement will help guide the process toward achieving that stronger future for HIM that we all want to see.” Reaction to the vote yielded a range of comments from current members. “It has its pros and cons,” said Barbara Beckett, RHIT, of Saint Luke’s Health System in St. Louis. “I can see letting people in on our own level, but as far as the higher levels, I wouldn’t want to see those people in there. But as far as being on boards, I think they would have a lot to offer.” “I think anybody should be able to join if they pass their national exams,” said Kathyrn Backstrom of St. John Medical Center in Longview, Wash. Other members made their feelings known but spoke under the condition that they remain anonymous. Here’s a sampling of those comments: “I’m not too glad it went over. The reason why is noncredentialed people will take over.” “The organization will no longer represent the professionals.” “I had a hard time with [the vote]. We worked
too hard to get our own organization going.” “While I still believe this was the wrong decision, it was the delegates’ decision and their responsibility to now execute. My major disappointment lies with those delegates who did not represent the members in their state [via their vote] whom did not support this amendment and voted en bloc [as did the board] to support this change,” she said. “However, now that this is done, it is time for those members who were apathetic or do not agree to go forward and create their own momentum as a volunteer leader for change,” she continued. “It is only by member participation and passion—which is the silver lining that this debate brought out—that we will move forward together to proactively bring about the changes and new slate of leadership that will hopefully be more member-focused, more data-driven, and more conscious of alternatives that exist to support future strategies.” After a weekend of workshops, meetings, and seminars, education tracks began with a wildly entertaining and provocative session from author Bertice Berry, PhD, who regaled the appreciative audience with her observational humor and inspirational stories. Later in the morning, a more relaxed David J. Brailer, MD, PhD, took the podium to offer an update on the future of HIT adoption. The former national coordinator for HIT, who said he could speak more freely now that he’s severed his ties with Washington, focused on what lies ahead for the HIM profession as it prepares to be a leader in the technology movement. “I have come to ask you to continue what you’ve done,” he said. “I see you as the vanguard to ensure our progress is not limited—that benefits accrue to patients.” Staying on the HIT topic was a panel of experts that addressed how best to connect clinicians who have yet to adopt electronic health records (EHRs). The discussion, moderated by Susan Hanson, MBA, RHIA, FAHIMA, president of TerraStar Consulting, featured William Jessee, MD, FACMPE, president and CEO of the Medical Group Management Association, Alisa Ray, executive director of the Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology (CCHIT), and Doug Henley, MD, executive vice president of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Each guest presented their ideas on how best to make HIT more attractive to physicians then fielded questions from the audience. Jessee cited the many roadblocks to EHR implementation, including the following: • cost (Jessee said the average EHR implementation cost $32,000 with an additional $1,200 per month for maintenance. Physicians can expect a 25% cost overrun from the vendor estimate, he noted); • perceived lack of return on investment; • need to change workflow; • too many choices (Many doctors wonder whether the vendor will be there tomorrow, Jessee said); • fear of change; • lack of interfaces to payors, labs, pharmacies, etc; and • dependence on hospitals for data. (Jessee said doctors are concerned with the consequences of switching hospitals.) Jessee said physicians will choose a practice management system that can bill and collect over an EHR every time, but warned that within five to seven years, any hospital or medical practice that doesn’t routinely use an EHR will be an economic disaster. Henley pointed out the many benefits of EHR adoption and how physicians can support each other by sharing their experiences with the technology. Ray then explained the CCHIT’s role in making EHR decisions easier by designating qualified products as certified. A lengthy question-and-answer session followed the presentations in which the panelists discussed the role of payors (create incentives, pay for use), why practices buy EHRs and then don’t use them, and the problem with hospitals that refuse to share patient data. — Lee DeOrio is editor of For The
Record.
|
 |