Healthcare IT NewsHealthcare IT News
  • Home
  • Sections
    • Industry News
    • Hospitals & IDNs
    • Physician Practices & Ambulatory Care
    • Payers
    • Vendors
    • International
  • Issues
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • Sept. 2009
  • Resource Central
    • All Resources
    • Research
    • White Papers
    • Web Seminars
    • Videos
    • Podcasts
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Jobs
  • About
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
  • Newsletters
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Solutions Series
Select Your Homepage
Search eConnect
Login | Register
Home » News » Industry News | Hospitals & IDNs | Physician Practices & Ambulatory Care

E-mail to a FriendPrint
Social Bookmarking
  • Delicious Delicious
  • Digg Digg
  • StumbleUpon StumbleUpon
  • Reddit Reddit
  • Newsvine Newsvine
  • Furl Furl
  • Facebook Facebook
  • Google Google
  • Yahoo Yahoo
Critics charge HIMSS-CCHIT connection 'too cozy'

Critics charge HIMSS-CCHIT connection 'too cozy'

March 06, 2009 | Neil Versel

Related Links

  • Illinois State records
  • Chilmark Research
  • Health Care Renewal blog

Suggested Content

  • Critics charge HIMSS-CCHIT connection ‘too cozy’
  • Blog: CCHIT critic identified
  • On The Move

CHICAGO – The discovery that the Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology (CCHIT) had lost its corporate standing has unleashed a storm of criticisms and false accusations on the Internet and has the organization fighting to protect its reputation.

A Feb. 13 comment on the Wall Street Journal Health Blog revealed that State of Illinois records listed CCHIT, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit Illinois corporation, as “involuntarily dissolved” as of April 11, 2008.

Though the long, rambling screed by an anonymous commenter contained numerous fallacies, a search of Illinois Secretary of State records in mid-February confirmed that Chicago-based CCHIT indeed had been dissolved. CCHIT corrected the problem, and the record now is listed as “active,” with a Feb. 17 filing date for annual reports.

CCHIT Marketing Director C. Sue Reber blames the involuntary dissolution on an “administrative error,” namely the failure of an attorney for CCHIT to file an annual report with state authorities. “It’s been remedied,” Reber says.

But that was just the tip of the iceberg for the online critics, who posted comments on numerous blogs, some using names that could not be confirmed as real. One pseudonymous writer called CCHIT a “scheme” by the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS) to escape taxes on millions of dollars supposedly pouring into both not-for-profit organizations.

Mark LeavittIn his comment, the writer referred to a “revolving door” for personnel between HIMSS, CCHIT and other organizations, noting that CCHIT Chairman Mark Leavitt, MD, once was chief medical officer of HIMSS, but wrongly claiming that Leavitt was still on the HIMSS payroll.

Reber denies those allegations. Although HIMSS, the National Alliance for Health Information Technology (NAHIT) and the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), created CCHIT in 2004 and provided some seed money, the commission is an independent entity. CCHIT has operated under a three-year, $7.5 million contract from the Department of Health and Human Services awarded in October 2005, and with revenues from testing fees. The HHS contract has been extended through April and may be in line for another extension, Reber says, in light of the federal stimulus package that includes $19 billion for healthcare IT.

Regardless of the corporate independence, some critics worry that the makeup of CCHIT’s board of trustees and board of commissioners creates serious conflicts of interest and leads to discrimination against small healthcare IT vendors. The trustees, who provide fiscal oversight and corporate governance, are chaired by AHIMA CEO Linda Kloss and include HIMSS President and CEO H. Stephen Lieber as well as a major vendor executive, Glen Tullman of Allscripts-Misys Healthcare Solutions. Representatives of several major vendors sit on the 21-member board of commissioners, which is responsible for setting testing criteria.

Scot Silverstein, MD, an instructor in biomedical informatics at Drexel University in Philadelphia, says no one with a financial interest in CCHIT’s work should sit on either board. “Even the appearance of a conflict destroys credibility,” according to Silverstein. “There’s plenty of people out there with no industry connections whatsoever who are qualified to evaluate technology,” he says.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • next ›
  • last »
Related Topics:
  • C. Sue Reber
  • Chicago
  • ComChart Medical Software
  • Department of Health and Human Services
  • Drexel University in Philadelphia
  • H. Stephen Lieber
  • Hayward Zwerling
  • Healthcare Information Technology
  • HIMSS
  • Illinois
  • information technology
  • John Moore
  • Linda Kloss
  • Mark Leavitt
  • National Alliance
  • Neil Versel
  • Philadelphia
  • Racquel Orenick
  • Scot Silverstein
  • stimulus
  • Wall Street Journal

Reader Comments (2)Login to Post a Comment

pH 7.40 says:

April 03, 2009 | 6:10PM GMT

times three

Let's have three separate buy equal entities with overlapping purpose and members to ensure that any windfall would land on all three.

That way no one involved in either/or all three will be missed.

Really, is it seemingly necessary to have three organizations dictate what and who will use whatever?

Systems have been in place in numerous hospitals for more than a decade. These organizations have done zilch to streamline my work or documentation. Not to mention each being proprietary software and therefore none communicate with each other. And nor do any of the insurance companies want to give each other the time of day.

Is it too much to ask to have one system in place so I, my department, my office, my billing does not have to work inside a dozen or more software systems to all ultimately do the same task?

Or is there simply too much money to be made to entrust anyone to do this much needed task?

I can not imagine the amount of money already wasted on needless products, support, service and software, not to mention yearly license fees, for systems that do not work and do not communicate with one another.

We are not going to fix this problem using the same model and modalities that led us to this point in time.

You can not solve the problem using the same think/speak that got us here.

Login to Post a Comment

scotsilv says:

March 10, 2009 | 7:41PM GMT

On conflict of interest and HIT industry validation

Regarding appearance of conflict of interest, I would like to add that medical technology tester The ECRI Institute has a robust approach. From their web page:

Conflict of Interest - The Integrity of Independence

"Remaining unbiased is difficult, if not impossible, when conflicts of interest are present [indeed - ed.] That is why we strictly enforce our conflict-of-interest rules and have carefully developed an environment that maximizes objectivity, productivity, and integrity of process. We accept no grants, gifts, finder’s fees, or consulting projects from, and our employees are not permitted to own stock shares in, medical device or pharmaceutical firms. To make sure that is the case, we examine each employee’s federal income tax return after it is filed. And, we accept no advertising revenues from any source."

This type of policy gives their reviews credibility both to physicians and to consumers skeptical of the healthcare industry.

As to an investigation of the HIT industry by Congress, we do not have reliable figures for the morbidity and mortality caused by health IT, have conflicting data on its benefits, and yet these devices are being relentlessly pushed onto the public without the public's consent. This is a patient's rights issue.

It is also troubling that pharma's clinical trials and other information systems are subject to federal validation and inspection, yet clinical IT used in patient care is not so regulated, even though such systems are more complex and have a more immediate and potentially irrevocable impact on patients.

There seems to be very little information sharing on HIT defects.

I wrote that due to these factors and other issues that "a congressional investigation of the HIT industry's development, marketing, talent management, contracting, QC, and information sharing practices (on bugs, UI problems and other defects) is warranted."

-- S. Silverstein

Login to Post a Comment

receive news by email

Most Popular

Latest Headlines
Most Popular
  • Five healthcare IT decisions to avoid
  • Blumenthal: EHRs will become 'an absolute requisite' for docs
  • Video program puts docs at bedside 24/7 at MassGeneral
  • FCC to promote mobile health apps
  • Spheris bankruptcy could spark bidding war, with MedQuist in the lead
  • Sankaran maps government's promotion of healthcare IT
  • North Carolina group offers help with ARRA
  • New Hampshire hospital pulls its data together
  • KLAS questions vendor claims on HIEs
  • Terso expands to Germany

Resource Central

  • White Papers
    St. Francis Care Uses Leading Edge Technology to Deliver First Class Healthcare Services
  • Web Seminars
    On-Demand--Integrated, Real-time Decision Making – A Prescription for Improving Patient Outcomes and Your Bottom Line
  • White Papers
    Six Things Hospitals Need to Know About Replacing Pagers With Smartphones
  • White Papers
    Solving Desktop Challenges in Healthcare with ScriptLogic's Desktop Authority
  • Research
    Business Trends - Healthcare Technology
More Resources
Syndicate content

HEALTHCARE IT JOB SPOT

  • Software Engineer - GE Healthcare - Boston, MA
  • Lead Software Engineer - GE Healthcare - Boston, MA
  • Conversion Analyst - GE Healthcare - WA
  • Show Site Director - GE Healthcare - North Carolina
  • Health Information Manager - Center for Spinal Surgery - Nashville, TN
more jobs

  • Destination HIMSS

    Going to HIMSS this year? Then you can't afford to miss our Destination HIMSS site and newsletter. 

  • EHRWatch.com

    EHRWatch.com offers news, commentary and community participation on the developments in electronic health records.

  • Priming the Pump

    Priming the Pump provides practical news on the stimulus package and the incentives that it offers to healthcare providers.

  • Facebook

    Join Healthcare IT News on Facebook to connect with other readers!

  • NHINWatch

    Visit NHINWatch.com for coverage of the Nationwide Health Information Network.

  • Mobile Health Watch

    Stay up to date on the latest mobility news at Mobile Health Watch.

  • MedTech Publishing

    Visit our company Web page to learn more about MedTech Publishing.

  • LinkedIn

    Join our LinkedIn group to connect with other readers. Click here to join the group.

     

  • Healthcare IT Job Spot

    Check out the latest open positions at Healthcare IT Job Spot.

Marketplace

  • Home
  • Issues
  • Resource Central
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
  • About Us
  • Site Map
  • Privacy Policy
Healthcare IT News is a publication of MedTech Publishing Company LLC.
For more information about MedTech Publishing Company and its publications, please visit medtechpublishing.com.
©2009 MedTech Publishing
Powered by Phase2 Technology.