Meaningful Use Potpourri – Meaningful Use Monday

We’ve been publishing Meaningful Use Monday for exactly two years today. Most of the posts have been written by the wonderful Lynn Scheps from SRSsoft and I think they represent a wonderful asset to those interested in meaningful use. That’s close to hundred posts on the subject of meaningful use and EHR incentive money. Hopefully readers have found it as useful as I have in understanding the complexities of meaningful use.

Considering how much we’ve posted about meaningful use, I think it’s time to move meaningful use out of a featured space on the site. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are many more meaningful use posts to come. In fact, it’s likely a post a week will still be about meaningful use and the EHR incentive money in one way or another. However, I hope that we can also help many doctors move past meaningful use to actually meaningfully using EHR and other healthcare technology. For example, I’m planning a series of posts on the benefits of EHR in the current environment. I expect it to drive some really interesting conversation.

Before I end the Meaningful Use Monday series to a more random assortment of meaningful use posts, I thought I’d provide a potpourri of meaningful use thoughts. I think you’ll find them interesting.

This is an interesting title since the article says that most won’t be able to show meaningful use and then goes on to list the statistics for how many doctors are using EHR. So, they’re using EHR, but they don’t have the capability to show meaningful use? To me EHR adoption is the more important number. I also like that EHR vendors have all applied the same CCD standard for data portability. I’m ok if many doctors forgo meaningful use. Although, we’ll see how that plays out if the penalties indeed go into effect.

This is music to my ears. I’ve been preaching this message for a long time. The odd part is that this article references the same studies and data as the first. What is clear from the numbers is that EHR adoption is up. That’s a good thing for healthcare since we need widespread EHR adoption to take the next step to technology adoption in healthcare.

I don’t think this is true, depending on how you define “apply.” I know very few doctors who have applied to meaningful use and not gotten paid. If you know of stories that say otherwise, I’d love to hear them. This is particularly true in meaningful use stage 1. We might see more meaningful use payment rejections in stage 2 and 3, but so far the money has basically flowed out. I think this is by design. The worst thing for ONC would be many doctors working towards meaningful use and then not getting paid.

Yep, meaningful use stage 2 is still getting tweaked. It’s hard to keep up.

Almost a third of the way there. I love this “shovel ready” part of the ARRA economic stimulus package. Makes me laugh to think about it.

About the author

John Lynn

John Lynn

John Lynn is the Founder of, a network of leading Healthcare IT resources. The flagship blog, Healthcare IT Today, contains over 13,000 articles with over half of the articles written by John. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 20 million times.

John manages Healthcare IT Central, the leading career Health IT job board. He also organizes the first of its kind conference and community focused on healthcare marketing, Healthcare and IT Marketing Conference, and a healthcare IT conference,, focused on practical healthcare IT innovation. John is an advisor to multiple healthcare IT companies. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can be found on Twitter: @techguy.

1 Comment

  • First those “experts” need to use the correct terminology.
    A doc doesn’t “apply” for meaningful use, he “attests”.

    Attesting is “declaring to be correct”.
    Applying is “making a request”.

    These two terms have entirely different legal ramifications.

    The referenced article from the CDC is…weak.
    To say 2/3’s of docs intend to participate says nothing.
    All that matters is how many actually have attested.

    Of course if you ask somebody if they intend to collect $44,000, they’ll say yes.

    BUT – once they see how much of a pain it is, and they try to attest at the last minute things change…I see this every day, but especially December last year and this year as I get panicked calls daily from offices trying to attest.

    I’m also curious which of the 2 Core Items a MU certified EHR can’t pass. If that is the case, it couldn’t/shouldn’t be MU certified.

    My gut tells me Core Items #4 (eRX) and #15 (Risk Assessment) are the items they make reference to.
    #4 typically requires an add-on module.
    #15 can’t be accomplished by the EHR. It is an actual risk assessment, not the software handing out a gold star.

    MU is not driving a docs EHR selection?? Is this a joke? Of course MU is not driving selection, the $44,000 check is driving selection. MU is just the torture session the comes along with getting government money. Though you have to admit anyone buying an EHR not MU certified is either an idiot or doesn’t want the check.

    If a doc is attesting, yet can’t pass, that is poor planning on their part. There is no reason, ZEro, ZILCH reason for an office to attest and not pass.
    You know what is required…
    You can look and see if you meet the requirements…
    With this being the case, whey would you attest if you don’t meet the requirements? That makes no sense.

    Shovel ready…the Memphis airport has a brand new “fantastic” parking complex that was “shovel ready”…that parking complex was one of the last things that town needed to spend money on.

Click here to post a comment