New final rule from ASTP:
✅ Streamlined prior authorization via FHIR
✅ Real-time drug costs at the point of care
✅ Updated eRx standards
Less red tape. Faster access. Better outcomes.
#HealthIT#FHIR
https://t.co/DWvLao6enm
So we have the #ASTP#ONC HTI-2 FR out! BUT, it is really just part of the proposed rule. HTI-2 FR deals with the TEFCA proposals and a few other administrative changes. The rest (USCDI v3, expanded API, public health, etc.) will come in later HTI-? rule. https://t.co/uC4B6TqQuA
@healthapiguy I'm still chewing through it but yea, this seems like this should have been separated into separate HTI-2 and HTI-3 NRPMs and maybe even an HTI-4 instead of all packaged together. There is a lot here.
I’ve obviously just quickly perused this and need more time, but proposed HTI-2 is far more complex than HTI-1. HTI-1 was mostly extending functionality from previous #ONC Cures and Edtions rules. HTI-2 is branching out in new areas and in new ways.
NEW PROPOSED RULE: Health Data, Technology, and Interoperability: Patient Engagement, Information Sharing, and Public Health Interoperability (HTI-2). Read the proposed rule: https://t.co/y27y8hEDdT #ONCHTI2
And of course today CMS also released their NPRM on PFS which has updates on MIPS 2025 proposals among other things. I guess I'm just happy they dropped these both today instead of last week before the 4th.
The proposed regulation text section itself is 200 pages long. That is basically the same size as the original 2011 Edition Final Rule, including comments/responses all put together. This is a big document.
Another comment on HTI-2's complexity. NPRM is over 1000 pages of PDF double space format ONC uses. That is basically the same size as a FR which typically double from their NPRM size because of all comments/responses in the preamble. HTI-2 FR will likely be close to 2000 pages.
@healthapiguy Finally, I'm sure ONC would quibble with the "inactive" phrase since they are active criteria but just not applicable to any CMS program at the moment to my knowledge.
@healthapiguy If you really want to be pedantic, you could put c.2-c.3 in their own subcategory of CEHRT because they are only needed in CEHRT IF you submit eCQM. If you use a qualified MIPS registry, you don't have to have c.2-c.3 for your CEHRT definition but that may be too complicated.
@healthapiguy I agree. It goes back to 2014 Edition when ONC introduced Cancer Case criteria but made it ambulatory only. Then antimicrobial was later added but only picked up in the inpatient PI program.
@healthapiguy For a.4, it use to be in old MU measure with CDS (a.9) but that is gone. Still, I think they keep primary because it is a rather obvious need for any modern eRx implementation.
@healthapiguy In HTI-1 NPRM, ONC mentioned possibly using b.7/b.8 to enforce the patient-requested restrictions. They dropped the requirement in FR, but I think they are keeping them active in case they use in future, but I don't know any program "requiring" it at the moment.