Skip Navigation

National Resource Center for Health IT (the Resource Center) to disseminate research findings, lessons learned, and case studies on the implementation and impact of AHRQ-funded health IT projects. The Resource Center leverages our investments in health IT by offering help where it is needed—real world clinical settings that may feel ill equipped to meet the implementation challenge—facilitating expert and peer-to-peer collaborative learning and fostering the growth of online communities who are planning, implementing, and researching health IT.

AHRQ collaborates with ONC and others to assure that our investments are closely aligned and concentrate specifically on the use of health IT to improve safety and quality in diverse health care settings.

To ensure that we harness the power that health IT has to offer, we need to develop an evidence-based strategy to help clinicians and health care leaders decide which health IT innovations should be adopted and how they should be implemented to maximize value—both to clinicians and patients today and to the public health and research enterprises.

HHS VIEWS OF DISCUSSION DRAFT HEALTH IT BILL

We appreciate the opportunity to provide initial comments on the discussion draft. We have been working with the Committee staff on the discussion draft and providing technical assistance. For purposes of this testimony, we will therefore take this important opportunity to discuss only the high-level issues we have with the proposed discussion draft.

Proposed Health IT Federal Advisory Committees (FACA)

The discussion draft would establish in statute two separate Federal advisory committees-an HIT Policy Committee and an HIT Standards Committee. We have significant concerns about freezing a particular set of structures in statute. In 2005, Secretary Leavitt chartered the American Health Information Community (AHIC) as a Federal Advisory Committee to make recommendations on how to accelerate the development and adoption of interoperable health information technology. For nearly a year, the AHIC and HHS have had ongoing discussions regarding the best possible successor to the AHIC, including discussions about its role, funding, and governance structure. It is envisioned that the AHIC successor will be an independent and sustainable organization that will bring together the best attributes and resources of public and private entities, a public-private partnership. Such an entity must be a neutral, independent body that is not controlled by, formed by, or required to report to any branch of government in order to assure independence and continue to build on progress to date.

The creation of new advisory committees under this bill would significantly interfere with the progress made in establishing an AHIC successor thus far. This approach would preempt and discount the significant efforts made by stakeholders to establish the AHIC successor, and impede efforts to foster the adoption of health information technologies and standards and realize an interoperable nationwide health information system.

Additionally, the proposed advisory committees’ membership would be determined through a political appointment process. We are concerned that the membership of these FACAs would politicize the successful collaborative advisory work ongoing through AHIC and the collaborative work going on through the current conveners of the AHIC Successor and would create barriers to rapid progress. Additionally maintaining two organizations could prove duplicative and costly.

Accordingly, we encourage the Committee to strike proposed sections 3002 and 3003 and allow the current public-private collaborative process already underway to proceed.

Proposed Process to Develop and Recommend Standards, Implementation Specifications and Certification Criterion

The discussion draft proposed to establish a FACA advisory committee known as the HIT Standards Committee, to recommend standards, implementation specifications and certification criteria to ONC for endorsement. Upon ONC endorsement, the recommendations would be sent forward to the Secretary for adoption through a Federal rulemaking process.

The adoption of health IT standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria through the use of rulemaking should be avoided. We have seen from prior statutory requirements that it significantly delays the applicability and usage of new and improved standards.

Proposed Privacy and Security Provisions

Business Associate Provisions

The Discussion Draft has three separate provisions relating to Business Associates. Section 316would state that organizations that require access to protected health information and transmit it to a covered entity, such as Health Information Exchanges, Regional Health Information Organizations (RHIO), and those involved in e-prescribing, must be treated as business associates for purposes of section 311. Section 311, in turn, would limit the use or disclosure of protected health information by a business associate to the purposes specified in the contract with the covered entity and would subject the business associate to civil and criminal penalties under HIPAA for violation of such contract terms. Similarly, section 301 would apply administrative, physical, and technical security standards to business associates and would also apply the HIPAA civil and criminal sanctions to a business associate for violations of these standards.

Under current law, only covered entities are subject to liability for violations of the HIPAA Privacy and Security standards. Business associates, because they are not covered entities, are therefore not liable for violations, through the covered entities themselves may, in some circumstances, be liable for the violations by their business associates. Under the Discussion Draft, RHIOs, Health Information Exchanges (HIE), and similar organizations, would still not become covered entities under HIPAA, but they would become liable for HIPAA civil and criminal penalties for using or disclosing protected information in a manner contrary to the terms of their business associate agreements with covered entities. While this is one approach to address gaps in the current coverage of HIPAA, the provision would not result in evenhanded treatment as other entities, such as PHR vendors, are not encompassed in this solution.

Moreover, in extending liability to business associates, the Discussion Draft would sweep all business associates under this same provision, making them all liable for contract violations. The potential exposure to criminal and civil liability may chill many from becoming business associates or may raise the cost of doing business in this manner. Many business associates (for example, interpreters) help consumers and others such as transcription services or accreditation services are essential for routine business operations.

Proposed Grants and Loans

Section 3011 of the discussion draft would provide for competitive grants and loans to facilitate the adoption of qualified health IT. The Administration does not believe that grants (or grant-supported state loan programs) are the most efficient manner to stimulate the widespread adoption of health IT; it believes the most appropriate and efficient ways to achieve widespread use of health IT are through market forces, rather than through direct subsidization of health IT purchases. In August 2006, the Centers for Medicare &Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) promulgated two final rules with an exception to the physician self-referral prohibition and a safe harbor under the anti-kickback statute, respectively, for certain arrangements involving the donation of interoperable EHR technology to physicians and other health care practitioners or entities from businesses with whom they work. The exception and safe harbor have made it possible for physicians and other health care practitioners or entities to obtain EHR software or information technology and training at substantially lower prices, up to 85% below the market costs.

Other Comments on the Discussion Draft

The discussion draft codifies the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. The Administration does not support statutorily establishing individual offices, which can limit needed flexibility to adjust duties and responsibilities as time requires.

The Administration continues to review this bill and anticipates having additional comments and questions about its impact and certain provisions. As part of this we are carefully reviewing sections 111 and 112 to assess and understand their potential impact on Federal programs, including Medicare, and the private sector. We are also carefully reviewing sections 302 and 315, regarding notification of breach of privacy, and section 312, to assess its impact on adoption of health IT.

CONCLUSION

The Administration shares the goals of the Committee with respect to health IT and looks forward to continuing work with you to improve the quality of our nation’s health care through its use. We hope to continue our work with the Committee as we move forward to address these concerns.

Last revised: March 26,2009