What may be happening with the ONC rule is akin to what DID happen with Net Neutrality and the ‘comment period’ from the FCC. Epic is fighting back but it may be too late unless more voices contribute to the discussion.
Background:
The Office of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology (ONC) recently put forth its 2020-2025 Strategic Plan laying out a host of broad objectives and goals for national HIT. It’s basically a precursor of mandates to come tied to the much longer (and wonkier) rule on interoperability and information blocking released prior to HIMSS 2019. And it has led some to speculate that the rule may be finalized very soon.
Epic pushed back on finalization of the rule as-is, encouraged hospital execs to do the same, and ONC representatives fired a shot across the bow, calling Epic objections a ‘smokescreen to protect their interests’. In a reasonably measured, compelling response, Epic cited real-world risks of overly broad mandates and the likelihood such an approach would lead to sensitive medical information falling into the hands of buyers and sellers of data - without permission. It’s worth a read.
The HIT Social Media Vacuum
Whether you side with ONC, Epic, or don’t know is of little import. What is important is that you are a) aware of the landscape shaping the discussion, b) have considered the overall impact on the HIT space, and c) make a conscious choice with regards to whether you define and/or own a role in any of it.
Those of us active on Social Media know there is a large cohort of HIT personalities actively posting and op-editorializing in support of the rule (on Twitter, in particular). Speaking from experience, we know that talking heads rarely put forth balanced discourse when HIT topics meet lack of Epic experience. And in regards to whether the majority of these personalities shaping the conversation have Epic experience: they do not.
That said, a carefully worded response from Epic, even threats of litigation, are not going to tip the scales of this argument where they’re being debated and matter: on the interwebs.
Call to Action
We’re not here to convince you the scales should be tipped one way or the other. What we would encourage though, is a reflection about where you are in your HIT journey. Are you here for the long-haul, do you have your 5-10+ year HIT plan laid out?
We’d encourage self-education on the proposed rule and both sides of the argument. Is Epic coming at this from a point of fairness? Is ONC and HHS paying credence to legitimate concerns? Is the comment period going to have any impact on the original rule delivered in March 2019?
Once having reflected, consider action under the umbrella of one of three approaches laid out below:
Support Your Team – do what you can on social and in-person to actively contribute to the conversations in support of your preferred side.
Engage in the Discourse when you feel, at a minimum, both sides are not being fairly represented.
Encourage Discourse: re-tweet and re-share both sides; add an anecdote if you wish; help to fill the vacuum.
Conclusion
Whether having previously worked at Epic or not, thinking about #WWDWWD from time to time doesn’t hurt. If doing what’s right is being threatened by ‘entrenched interests’ (as the National Coordinator labeled the plan’s opponents), or perhaps threatened by the proponents of the soon to be finalized mandates, will you take a stand? Will you at least help to level the playing field in the vacuum? We think you should.
Thanks for reading. If you do choose to get involved, please start by following and engaging with people you trust on social media. You can follow me here and here and I would encourage you to take a look at some of those I interact with regularly too.