Page Comparison

1

Cary Paul

Pivotal Insight, LLC.

2

x

David Crooke

Pivotal Insight, LLC.

3

Amy Stowers

Maximus

4

x

Ken Rubin

VA/Utah

5

x

Linda Chan

Pivotal Insight, LLC.

6

x

Dhruv Sharma

ACEP

7

x

John Svirbely

Trisotech

8

x

Shane McNamee

Perspecta

9

Tracie Berardi

OMG

10

x

Pawan Goyal

ACEP

11

x

Mike Cesino

12

x

Mike Meier

Business Use Case Analysis

• Who are the buyers

• What is the price

• Business Trends

• ROI

• Spans the communities and holistic around all of BPM+

Statement of Value

• What is the benefits

• What are the key value statements for different action and communications

• Target Audience: Arriving toward and organization that wants to do authoring of clinical pathways

• Differentiate between those that want to do authoring verse those that are trying to consume authored artifacts

Out of Scope of Authoring Work group

• Why an institution would want to adopt or institute shareable pathways

• Bill: Are there studies about how pathways are instituted and used, and the implications of that. (ref: Look at oncology Pathways)

Examples:

Clinical Pathways: Reducing Costs and Improving Quality Across a Network

Impact of Electronically Accessible Pathways on Clinical Trial Enrollment at a Large Multisite Cancer Center

Work What Success looks like? (6-12 mos)

• Why would someone want to be involved

• What is the path-How do I start, and what does the path look like?

• Best practices-how do I do this well ? What has been learned?

  • What guidance should I follow?

• Why should I want to be an author involved in BPM+?

• How does one take a 100+page PDF guideline and make it into a machine readable model that could be ingested into a system.” Taking the story, approach, tips, tricks, etc. so that other can do this. Either de novo or adapting existing content. This is authoring.

  • New clinical societies

  • Healthcare delivery orgs

• Why would an organization choose this ?

• If we make the decision, how do we make it so?

• What does “doing it well” looks like: (e.g. Maturity Model, etc.)

Work Products to do this

• Artifact: Criteria Set/Guide ( ?)

  • Purpose: Define what a well authored model looks like

  • Audience: Person or org stepping up and establishing an authoring capability

    • As a Technologies: Defines what a well authored model looks like

    • As a Functional: Shows what a well authored model looks like

    • Business: secondary reference

  • Contents:

    • Investments that would need to be made (e.g Tooling, training

    • How to address variability and drive towards consistency (e.g., glossaries, patterns, standardized nomenclature, terminology) ; recognize and applying patterns

    • Snapshot of good authoring practices, approaches. Best practices, characteristics, etc. Potential maturity model to advance organizational capacity to develop pathways.

    • Quality criteria-what represents a good authored artifacts.

    • Dealing with settings, variances, local adaptation/configuration

    • Access to functional expertise

Work Products to do this

What is the artifact: Value Proposition for Authoring Organizations

What is the purpose

• Explain why formal authoring is valuable

• Helping advance usability of EHRs: role in improving efficacy of EHR

• Marrying CPGs into clinical practice congruent to clinical workflow;

• Making these more consumable and implementable

Who is its audience:

• As a Technologies: Clinical embeds supporting technology companies

• As a Functional: Full spectrum clinical community, those building guidelines or maintaining them;

• Business: secondary reference

• Adopting organization: rationalize the art of the possible; value of direct consumption of guidelines.

• Specialty Societies: Authoritative creators or stewards of content.

• Payers:

Contents:

• Mission

• Specific Purpose

• “Customers”

• Problem being solved

• Unique value proposition

• Case Studies/Exemplars