Electronic Health Records: DOD and VA Have Increased Their
Sharing of Health Information, but More Work Remains (28-JUL-08,
GAO-08-954).
Under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008, the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) are required to accelerate the exchange of
health information between the departments and to develop systems
or capabilities that allow for full interoperability (generally,
the ability of systems to use data that are exchanged) and that
are compliant with federal standards. The act also established a
joint interagency program office to act as a single point of
accountability for the effort, whose function is to implement
such systems or capabilities by September 30, 2009. Further, the
act required that GAO semi-annually report on the progress made
in achieving these goals. For this first report, GAO describes
the departments' progress to date in sharing electronic health
information, developing electronic health records that comply
with federal standards, and setting up the joint interagency
program office. To do so, GAO reviewed its past work, analyzed
agency documentation, and conducted interviews with agency
officials.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-08-954
ACCNO: A83103
TITLE: Electronic Health Records: DOD and VA Have Increased
Their Sharing of Health Information, but More Work Remains
DATE: 07/28/2008
SUBJECT: Data collection
Data integrity
Data storage
Data transmission
Electronic data interchange
Electronic health records
Government information dissemination
Health care programs
Information disclosure
Information technology
Interagency relations
Interoperability
Medical information systems
Medical records
Program evaluation
Records
Records management
Reporting requirements
Standards
Standards evaluation
Strategic planning
Information sharing
Program goals or objectives
Program implementation
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-08-954
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to [email protected].
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
July 2008:
Electronic Health Records:
DOD and VA Have Increased Their Sharing of Health Information, but More
Work Remains:
GAO-08-954:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-08-954, a report to congressional requesters.
Why GAO Did This Study:
Under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, the
Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
are required to accelerate the exchange of health information between
the departments and to develop systems or capabilities that allow for
full interoperability (generally, the ability of systems to use data
that are exchanged) and that are compliant with federal standards. The
act also established a joint interagency program office to act as a
single point of accountability for the effort, whose function is to
implement such systems or capabilities by September 30, 2009.
Further, the act required that GAO semi-annually report on the progress
made in achieving these goals. For this first report, GAO describes the
departments� progress to date in sharing electronic health information,
developing electronic health records that comply with federal
standards, and setting up the joint interagency program office. To do
so, GAO reviewed its past work, analyzed agency documentation, and
conducted interviews with agency officials.
What GAO Found:
DOD and VA are sharing some, but not all, electronic health information
at different levels of interoperability. Specifically, pharmacy and
drug allergy data on about 18,300 patients who receive care from both
departments are exchanged at the highest level of interoperability�that
is, in computable form; at this level, the data are in a standardized
format that a computer application can act on (for example, to provide
alerts to clinicians of drug allergies). In other cases, data can be
viewed only�a lower level of interoperability that still provides
clinicians with important information. However, not all electronic
health information is yet shared, and information is still captured on
paper at many DOD medical facilities. According to the departments, a
DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan (targeted for approval in
August 2008) is to address these and other issues and define tasks
required to guide the development and implementation of an
interoperable electronic health record capability. If properly
developed and implemented, the plan could help the departments achieve
the goal of seamless sharing of health information.
DOD and VA have agreed upon numerous common standards that allow them
to share health data, which include standards that are part of current
and emerging federal interoperability specifications. This
collaboration provided the essential foundation for the departments to
begin sharing computable health data. The departments are currently
participating in recent initiatives led by the Office of the National
Coordinator for Health Information Technology (within the Department of
Health and Human Services) that are aimed at promoting the adoption of
federal standards and broader use of electronic health records. These
initiatives include identifying relevant existing standards,
identifying and addressing overlaps and gaps in the standards, and
developing interoperability specifications and certification criteria
based on these standards. The involvement of the departments in these
activities is an important mechanism for aligning their electronic
health records with emerging federal standards.
In establishing the joint interagency program office, Congress directed
the departments to develop an implementation plan for setting up the
office and carrying out related activities (such as validating and
establishing requirements for interoperable health capabilities). The
departments� effort to set up the program office is still in its early
stages. Leadership positions in the office are not yet permanently
filled, staffing is not complete, and facilities to house the office
have not been designated. Further, the implementation plan is currently
in draft, and although it includes schedules and milestones, dates for
several activities have not yet been determined (such as implementing a
capability to share immunization records), even though all capabilities
are to be achieved by September 2009. Without a fully established
program office and a finalized implementation plan with set milestones,
the departments may be challenged in meeting the required date for
achieving interoperable electronic health records and capabilities.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO is recommending that the departments give priority to fully
establishing the program office and finalizing the implementation plan.
Commenting on a draft of this report, DOD and VA concurred with GAO�s
recommendations and described actions planned or being taken to address
them.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-954]. For more
information, contact Valerie Melvin at (202) 512-6304 or
[email protected].
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
DOD and VA Are Currently Sharing Health Information at Different Levels
of Interoperability, but More Work Remains to Share All Health
Information:
DOD and VA Have Adopted Standards to Allow Sharing and Are Taking Steps
to Follow Federal Standards, Which Continue to Evolve:
DOD and VA Have Taken Steps to Establish the Joint Interagency Program
Office, but the Office Does Not Yet Have Permanent Leadership, Staff,
or Facilities:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs:
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Related GAO Products:
Tables:
Table 1: Current and Emerging Interoperability Specifications:
Table 2: Selected DOD Legacy Medical Information Systems and Databases:
Table 3: Data Elements Made Available and Planned by DOD/VA
Initiatives:
Figure:
Figure 1: Levels of Interoperability:
Abbreviations:
AHLTA: Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application:
BHIE: Bidirectional Health Information Exchange:
CHCS: Composite Health Care System:
CHDR: Interface between DOD's Clinical Data Repository (CDR) and VA's
Health Data Repository (HDR):
CIS: Clinical Information System:
DOD: Department of Defense:
FHIE: Federal Health Information Exchange:
HHS: Department of Health and Human Services:
HITSP: Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel:
IT: information technology:
LDSI: Laboratory Data Sharing Interface:
OMB: Office of Management and Budget:
SNOMED CT: Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms:
VA: Department of Veterans Affairs:
VistA: Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
July 28, 2008:
Congressional Committees:
For the last decade, the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA) have been pursuing initiatives to share data
between their health information systems. The departments' efforts have
included working toward a long-term vision of a single "comprehensive,
lifelong medical record"[Footnote 1] that would allow each service
member to transition seamlessly between the two departments, as well as
more short-term efforts focused on meeting immediate needs to share
health information, including responding to current military crises.
However, the two departments cannot yet share all essential health
information,[Footnote 2] prompting continuing calls for progress in
this area. In May 2003, a presidential task force recommended that DOD
and VA develop and deploy bidirectional electronic health records by
fiscal year 2005. In July 2007, the President's Commission on Care for
America's Returning Wounded Warriors reported that the departments had
continued to develop independent, stand-alone systems and recommended
that the two departments move rapidly to make all essential health
information available to clinicians.[Footnote 3]
To expedite the departments' efforts to exchange health care
information, Congress included in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2008 provisions that DOD and VA jointly develop and
implement electronic health record systems or capabilities and
accelerate the exchange of health care information.[Footnote 4] The act
also required that these systems or capabilities be compliant with
applicable interoperability[Footnote 5] standards, implementation
specifications, and certification criteria of the federal government.
The act established a joint interagency program office to act as a
single point of accountability for the effort, with the function of
implementing, by September 30, 2009, electronic health record systems
or capabilities that allow for full interoperability of personal health
care information between the departments.
In addition, the act required that GAO semi-annually report on the
progress that DOD and VA have made in achieving the goal of fully
interoperable personal health care information. As agreed with the
committees of jurisdiction, our objectives for this first report are to
describe (1) the departments' progress to date on developing electronic
health records systems or capabilities that allow for full
interoperability of personal health care information between the
departments; (2) steps taken by the departments to ensure that their
health records comply with applicable interoperability standards,
implementation specifications, and certification criteria of the
federal government; and (3) efforts to set up the joint interagency
program office.
To carry out these objectives, we reviewed our past work in this area;
[Footnote 6] analyzed agency documentation (including schedules and
benchmarks for the establishment of the joint interagency program
office, program documents, and health information standards); and
conducted interviews with officials from DOD, VA, and the Department of
Health and Human Services' Office of the National Coordinator for
Health Information Technology. We also visited two medical sites
(Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the Washington, D.C., VA Medical
Center) to observe the sharing capabilities of the electronic health
information systems that are currently in place.
We conducted this performance audit from March 2008 through July 2008
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives. For more details on our
scope and methodology, see appendix I.
Results in Brief:
DOD and VA have established and implemented mechanisms to achieve
interoperable sharing of some, but not all, electronic health
information. This information is shared at different levels of
interoperability. Specifically, pharmacy and drug allergy data on about
18,300 shared patients (that is, patients who receive care from both
departments) are exchanged at the highest level of interoperability--
that is, in computable form. At this level, the data are in a
standardized format that a computer application can act on (for
example, to provide alerts to clinicians of drug allergies). In other
cases, data that are shared cannot be acted upon by an application but
can be viewed--a lower level of interoperability that nonetheless
provides clinicians with important health information. Viewable data
that are currently shared include, among other things, microbiology
results, cytology reports, and chemistry and hematology reports.
However, not all electronic health information is yet shared; for
example, immunization records and history, data on exposure to health
hazards, and psychological health treatment and care records. Finally,
although VA's health information is all captured electronically, not
all health data collected by DOD are electronic--many DOD medical
facilities use paper-based health records. According to the
departments, a DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan (targeted for
approval in August 2008) is to address issues including future sharing
and paper records and define tasks required to guide the development
and implementation of an interoperable electronic health record
capability. If this plan includes the essential elements needed to
guide the departments in achieving their long-term goal of seamless
sharing of health information, it could improve the prospects for the
achievement of this goal.
DOD and VA have agreed upon numerous common standards that allow them
to share health data, which include standards that are part of current
and emerging federal interoperability specifications. The foundation
built by this collaborative process has allowed DOD and VA to begin
sharing computable health data (the highest level of interoperability).
Continuing their historical involvement in efforts to agree upon
standards for the electronic exchange of clinical health information,
the departments are also participating in recent ongoing initiatives
led by the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information
Technology (within the Department of Health and Human Services) that
are aimed at promoting the adoption of federal standards and broader
use of electronic health records.[Footnote 7] As federal standards
evolve and are put into place, the involvement of the departments in
these initiatives is an important mechanism for ensuring that their
electronic health records are aligned with emerging standards.
To accelerate DOD's and VA's ongoing interoperability efforts, Congress
directed that a joint interagency program office be developed and
required the departments to develop an implementation plan for setting
up the office and carrying out related activities (such as validating
and establishing requirements for interoperable health capabilities).
However, the departments' effort to set up the program office is still
in its early stages. Leadership positions in the office are not yet
permanently filled, staffing is not complete, and facilities to house
the office have not been designated. Further, the implementation plan
is currently in draft, and although it includes schedules and
milestones, dates for several activities have not yet been determined
(such as implementing a capability to share immunization records), even
though all capabilities are to be achieved by September 2009. Without a
fully established program office and a finalized implementation plan
with set milestones, the departments may be challenged in meeting the
required date for achieving interoperable electronic health records and
capabilities.
To better ensure the successful attainment of interoperable electronic
health record systems or capabilities, we are recommending that the
Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs give priority to fully
establishing the joint interagency program office and finalizing the
draft implementation plan.
In providing written comments on a draft of this report, the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs concurred with the report's recommendations. (The departments'
comments are reproduced in app. II and app. III, respectively.) The
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs stated that high
priority will be given to fully establishing the Joint Interagency
Program Office, with specific focus on expanding efforts related to
permanent leadership, staff, and facilities. VA's comments describe
actions that begin to address our recommendations. Among the actions,
the department noted that it plans to appoint the Deputy Director for
the Joint Interagency Program Office by October 2008, and to hire
permanent program staff by December 2008. In addition, VA stated that
by October 31, 2008, the departments expect to identify the milestones
and timelines for defining requirements to support interoperable health
records. If the actions planned are properly implemented, they should
help ensure that DOD and VA will be successful in meeting their goals
for sharing interoperable health information.
Background:
As we have reported,[Footnote 8] the use of information technology (IT)
to electronically collect, store, retrieve, and transfer clinical,
administrative, and financial health information has great potential to
help improve the quality and efficiency of health care and is critical
to improving the performance of the U.S. health care system. Critical
health information for a patient seeking treatment (such as allergies,
current treatments or medications, and prior diagnoses) has,
historically, been scattered across paper records kept by many
different caregivers in many different locations, making it difficult
for a clinician to access all of a patient's health information at the
time of care. Lacking access to these critical data makes it
challenging for a clinician to make the most informed decisions on
treatment options, potentially putting the patient's health at greater
risk. The use of electronic health records can help provide this access
and improve clinical decisions.[Footnote 9]
Electronic health records are particularly crucial for optimizing the
health care provided to military personnel and veterans. While in
military status and later as veterans, many DOD and VA patients tend to
be highly mobile and may have health records residing at multiple
medical facilities within and outside the United States. Making such
records electronic can help ensure that complete health care
information is available for most military service members and veterans
at the time and place of care, no matter where it originates.
Key to making health care information electronically available is the
ability to share that data among health care providers--that is,
interoperability. Interoperability is the ability for different
information systems or components to exchange information and to use
the information that has been exchanged. This capability is important
because it allows patients' electronic health information to move with
them from provider to provider, regardless of where the information
originated. If electronic health records conform to interoperability
standards, they can be created, managed, and consulted by authorized
clinicians and staff across more than one health care organization,
thus providing patients and their caregivers the necessary information
required for optimal care. (Paper-based health records--if available--
also provide necessary information, but unlike electronic health
records, paper records do not provide decision support capabilities,
such as automatic alerts about a particular patient's health, or other
advantages of automation.)
Interoperability can be achieved at different levels. At the highest
level, data are in a format that a computer can understand and operate
on, whereas at the minimum type of interoperability, the data are in a
format that is viewable, so that information is available for a human
being to read and interpret. Figure 1 shows various levels of
interoperability and examples of the types of data that can be shared
at each level.
Figure 1: Levels of Interoperability:
[See PDF for image]
This figure is an illustration of the Levels of Interoperability. Each
item requires increasingly more sophisticated IT and standardization:
* Nonelectronic data: paper health records;
* Unstructured, viewable electronic data: scanned information in PDF
file;
* Structured, viewable electronic data: uncoded textual information;
* Computable electronic data: standardized, coded information.
Source: GAO analysis based on data from the Center for Information
Technology leadership.
[End of figure]
As the figure shows, paper records can be considered interoperable in
that they allow data to be read and interpreted by a human being. In
the remainder of this report, however, we do not discuss
interoperability in this sense; instead, we focus on electronic
interoperability, for which the first level of interoperability is
unstructured, viewable electronic data. With unstructured data, a
clinician would have to find needed or relevant information by scanning
uncategorized information. The value of viewable data is increased if
the data are structured so that information is categorized and easier
to find. At the highest level, as shown, the computer can interpret and
act on the data.
Not all data require the same level of interoperability. For example,
in their initial efforts to implement computable data, VA and DOD
focused on outpatient pharmacy and drug allergy data because clinicians
gave priority to the need for automated alerts to help medical
personnel avoid administering inappropriate drugs to patients. On the
other hand, for such narrative data as clinical notes, viewability may
be sufficient. Achieving even a minimal level of interoperability is
valuable for potentially making all relevant information available to
clinicians.
Efforts to Adopt and Implement Federal Interoperability Standards Are
Ongoing:
Any type of interoperability depends on the use of agreed-upon
standards to ensure that information can be shared and used. In health
IT, standards govern areas ranging from technical issues, such as file
types and interchange systems, to content issues, such as medical
terminology. Developing, coordinating, and agreeing on standards are
only part of the processes involved in achieving interoperability for
electronic health records systems or capabilities. In addition,
specifications are needed for implementing the standards, as well as
criteria and a process for verifying compliance with the standards.
In December 2001, an effort to establish federal health information
standards was initiated as an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) e-
government project to enable federal agencies to build interoperable
health data systems. This project, the Consolidated Health Informatics
initiative, was a collaborative agreement among federal agencies,
including DOD and VA, to adopt a common set of health information
standards for the electronic exchange of clinical health information.
Under the Consolidated Health Informatics initiative, DOD, VA, and
other participating agencies agreed to endorse 20 sets of standards to
make it easier for information to be shared across agencies and to
serve as a model for the private sector. For example, standard
medication terminologies were agreed upon, which DOD and VA then began
to adopt in developing their data repositories.
Recognizing the need for public and private sector collaboration to
achieve a national interoperable health IT infrastructure, the
President issued an executive order in April 2004 that called for
widespread adoption of interoperable electronic health records by 2014.
[Footnote 10] This order established the Office of the National
Coordinator for Health Information Technology within the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) with responsibility, among other
things, for developing, maintaining, and directing the implementation
of a strategic plan to guide the nationwide implementation of
interoperable health IT in both the public and private health care
sectors. Among its responsibilities as the chief advisor to the
Secretary of HHS in this area, the Office of the National Coordinator
is to report progress on the implementation of this strategic plan.
Under the direction of HHS (through the Office of the National
Coordinator), three primary organizations were designated to play major
roles in expanding the implementation of health IT:
* the American Health Information Community;
* the Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel, and:
* the Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology.
All three are involved in various processes related to electronic
health records interoperability standards. The functions of these
organizations are described in the following.
American Health Information Community:
The community is a federal advisory body created by the Secretary of
HHS to make recommendations on how to accelerate the development and
adoption of health IT, including advancing interoperability,
identifying health IT standards, advancing nationwide health
information exchange, and protecting personal health information.
Formed in September 2005, the community is made up of representatives
from both the public and private sectors.
The American Health Information Community determines specific health
care areas of high priority and develops "use cases"[Footnote 11] for
these areas, which provide the context in which standards would be
applicable. For example, the community has developed a use case
regarding the creation of standardized, secure records of past and
current laboratory test results for access by health professionals. The
use case conveys how health care professionals would use such records
and what standards would apply.
Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP):
Developed in October 2005, the Healthcare Information Technology
Standards Panel (HITSP) is a public-private partnership, sponsored by
the American National Standards Institute[Footnote 12] and funded by
the Office of the National Coordinator. (HITSP is the successor to the
Consolidated Health Informatics initiative, which was dissolved and
absorbed into the panel on September 30, 2006.) The panel was
established to identify competing standards for the use cases developed
by the American Health Information Community and "harmonize" the
standards. (Harmonization is the process of identifying overlaps and
gaps in relevant standards and developing recommendations to address
these overlaps and gaps.)
For example, for the three initial use cases developed by the American
Health Information Community, HITSP identified competing standards by
converting the use cases into detailed requirements documents; it then
examined and assessed more than 700 existing standards that would meet
those requirements. From those 700 standards, the panel identified 30
named standards and produced detailed implementation guidance
describing the specific transactions and use of these named standards.
This guidance is codified in an interoperability specification for each
use case that integrates the standards.
Each of the interoperability specifications developed by HITSP includes
references to the identified standards or parts of standards and
explains how they should be applied to specific topics. For example,
among the standards referred to in one interoperability specification
[Footnote 13] is the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical
Terms (SNOMED CT).[Footnote 14] This standard is to be used in the "Lab
Result Terminology Component" of the specification.
Once developed, the specifications are presented to the American Health
Information Community, which assesses them for recommendation to the
Secretary of HHS. The Secretary publicly "accepts" recommended
specifications for a 1-year period of implementation testing, after
which the Secretary can formally "recognize" the specifications and
associated guidance as interoperability standards. This two-step
process is intended to ensure that software developers have adequate
time to implement recognized standards in their software. The year
between acceptance and recognition allows the panel to refine its
implementation guidance based on feedback from actual software
implementation.
Table 1 shows the current status of the interoperability specifications
developed by HITSP.
Table 1: Current and Emerging Interoperability Specifications:
Interoperability specification: IS 01. Electronic Health Record (EHR)
Laboratory Results Reporting;
Description: To define specific standards to support the
interoperability between electronic health records and laboratory
systems and secure access to laboratory results and interpretations in
a patient-centric manner;
Status[A]: Version 2.1 recognized; Version 3.0 released (panel
approved).
Interoperability specification: IS 02. Biosurveillance;
Description: To define specific standards that promote the exchange
among healthcare providers and public health authorities of
biosurveillance information (that is, information on areas such as
human health, hospital preparedness, state and local preparedness,
vaccine research and procurement, animal health, food and agriculture
safety, and environmental monitoring);
Status[A]: Version 2.1 recognized; Version 3.0 released (panel
approved).
Interoperability specification: IS 03. Consumer Empowerment;
Description: To define specific standards needed to enable the exchange
of data between patients and their caregivers;
Status[A]: Version 2.1 recognized; Version 3.0 accepted (retitled
Consumer Empowerment and Access to Clinical Information via Networks).
Interoperability specification: IS 04. Emergency Responder Electronic
Health Record (ER-EHR);
Description: To define specific standards required to track and provide
on-site emergency care professionals, medical examiner/fatality
managers and public health practitioners with needed information
regarding care, treatment, or investigation of emergency incident
victims;
Status[A]: Version 1.1 accepted.
Interoperability specification: IS 05. Consumer Empowerment and Access
to Clinical Information via Media;
Description: To define specific standards needed to assist patients in
making decisions regarding care and healthy lifestyles (that is,
registration information, medication history, lab results, current and
previous health conditions, allergies, summaries of healthcare
encounters and diagnoses);
Status[A]: Version 1.0 accepted.
Interoperability specification: IS 06. Quality;
Description: To define specific standards needed to benefit providers
by providing a collection of data for inpatient and ambulatory care and
to benefit clinicians by providing real-time or near-real-time feedback
regarding quality indicators for specific patients;
Status[A]: Version 1.0 accepted.
Interoperability specification: IS 07. Medication Management;
Description: To define specific standards to facilitate access to
necessary medication and allergy information for consumers, clinicians,
pharmacists, health insurance agencies, inpatient and ambulatory care,
etc;
Status[A]: Version 1.0 released (panel approved).
Source: GAO analysis of HITSP data.
[A] "Recognized" means that the specifications and associated guidance
have been recognized by the Secretary of HHS as interoperability
standards.
"Accepted" means that the specifications and associated guidance have
been accepted by the Secretary for a 1-year period of implementation
testing.
"Released (panel approved)" means that HITSP has completed and approved
the specifications and associated guidance.
[End of table]
Each of the interoperability specifications in the table is associated
with one of the seven use cases developed by the American Health
Information Community in 2006 and 2007. The community is also
developing six use cases for 2008, for which interoperability
specifications have not yet been released:
* Remote Monitoring;
* Patient-Provider Secure Messaging;
* Personalized Healthcare;
* Consultation and Transfers of Care;
* Public Health Case Reporting, and:
* Immunizations & Response Management.
Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology:
The commission is an independent, nonprofit organization that certifies
health IT products. HHS entered into a contract with the commission in
October 2005 to develop and evaluate the certification criteria and
inspection process for electronic health records. According to HHS,
certification is to be the process by which the IT systems of federal
health contractors are established to meet federal interoperability
standards. Certification helps assure purchasers and other users of
health IT systems that the systems will provide needed capabilities
(including ensuring security and confidentiality) and will work with
other systems without reprogramming. Certification also encourages
adoption of health IT by assuring providers that their systems can
participate in nationwide health information exchange in the future. In
2006, the commission certified the first 37 ambulatory--or clinician
office-based--electronic health record products as meeting baseline
criteria for functionality, security, and interoperability. In 2007,
the commission expanded certification to inpatient--or hospital--
electronic health record products, which could significantly increase
patients' and providers' access to the health information generated
during a hospitalization. To date, the commission has certified over
100 electronic health record products.
Our Previous Work Has Emphasized the Importance of a National Strategy:
Since 2005, we have reported and testified on the various actions that
HHS and the Office of the National Coordinator have taken to advance
nationwide implementation of health IT, which include the establishment
of the American Health Information Community and related activities,
selection of initial standards to address specific health areas, and
the release in July 2004 of a framework for strategic action.[Footnote
15]
We pointed out in 2005 that this framework did not constitute a
comprehensive national strategy with detailed plans, milestones, and
performance measures needed to ensure that the outcomes of the
department's various initiatives are integrated and its goals are met
[Footnote 16]. As a result, we recommend that HHS establish detailed
plans and milestones for each phase of the framework for strategic
action and take steps to ensure that those plans are followed and
milestones met.
In this regard, in June 2008, the Office of the National Coordinator
released a four-year strategic plan. Although we have not yet fully
assessed this plan, if its milestones and measures for achieving an
interoperable national infrastructure for health IT are appropriate,
the plan could provide a useful roadmap to support the goal of
widespread adoption of interoperable electronic health records.
DOD and VA Have Been Pursuing Efforts to Exchange Health Information
for a Decade:
DOD and VA have been working to exchange patient health data
electronically since 1998. However, the departments have faced
considerable challenges in project planning and management, leading to
repeated changes in the focus of their initiatives and target
completion dates. In reviews in 2001 and 2002, we noted management
weaknesses, such as inadequate accountability and poor planning and
oversight, and recommended that the departments apply principles of
sound project management.[Footnote 17] In response, by July 2002, DOD
and VA had revised their strategy to pursue two initiatives: (1)
sharing information in existing systems and (2) developing modernized
health information systems--replacing their existing (legacy) systems--
that would be able to share data and, ultimately, use interoperable
electronic health records.
In their shorter-term initiatives to share information from existing
systems, the departments began from different positions. VA has one
integrated medical information system--the Veterans Health Information
Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA)--which uses all electronic
records and was developed in-house by VA clinicians and IT personnel.
All VA medical facilities have access to all VistA information.
In contrast, DOD uses multiple legacy medical information systems
(table 1 illustrates selected systems), all of which are commercial
software products that are customized for specific uses. Until
recently, these systems could not share information. In addition, not
all of DOD's medical information is electronic: certain records are
paper-based.
Table 2: Selected DOD Legacy Medical Information Systems and Databases:
System name: CHCS: Composite Health Care System;
Description: Formerly DOD's primary health information system; still in
use to capture pharmacy, radiology, and laboratory information[A].
System name: CIS: Clinical Information System;
Description: Commercial health information system customized for DOD;
used by some DOD facilities for inpatients.
System name: ICDB: Integrated Clinical Database;
Description: Health information system used by many Air Force
facilities.
System name: TMDS: Theater Medical Data Store;
Description: Database to collect electronic medical information in
combat theater for both outpatient care and serious injuries; also
tracks the movement of patients as they are transferred from location
to location.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[A] According to DOD, CHCS applications are now accessed through its
modernized health information system, Armed Forces Health Longitudinal
Technology Application (AHLTA). The department no longer considers
AHLTA as an acronym but as the official name of the system.
[End of table]
As we have reported,[Footnote 18] the departments' efforts to share
information in their existing systems eventually included several
sharing initiatives and exchange projects:
* The Federal Health Information Exchange (FHIE), completed in 2004,
enabled DOD to electronically transfer service members' electronic
health information to VA when the members left active duty.
* The Laboratory Data Sharing Interface (LDSI), a project established
in 2004, allows DOD and VA facilities to share laboratory resources.
This interface, now deployed at nine locations, allows the departments
to communicate orders for lab tests and their results electronically.
* The Bidirectional Health Information Exchange (BHIE), also
established in 2004, was aimed at allowing clinicians at both
departments viewable access to records on shared patients (that is,
those who receive care from both departments--for example, veterans may
receive outpatient care from VA clinicians and be hospitalized at a
military treatment facility).[Footnote 19] Another benefit of the
interface is that it allows DOD sites to see previously inaccessible
data at other DOD sites.
In the long term, each of the departments aims to develop a modernized
system in the context of a common health information architecture that
would allow a two-way exchange of health information. The common
architecture is to include standardized, computable data;
communications; security; and high-performance health information
systems: DOD's Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application
(AHLTA)[Footnote 20] and VA's HealtheVet. The departments' modernized
systems are to store information (in standardized, computable form) in
separate data repositories: DOD's Clinical Data Repository (CDR) and
VA's Health Data Repository (HDR). For the two-way exchange of health
information, the two repositories are to be linked through an interface
named CHDR,[Footnote 21] which the departments began to develop in
March 2004; implementation of the first release of the interface (at
one site) occurred in September 2006.
Beyond these initiatives, in January 2007, the departments announced a
further change to their information-sharing strategy: their intention
to jointly determine an approach for inpatient health records. On July
31, 2007, they awarded a contract for a feasibility study and
exploration of alternatives.[Footnote 22] According to the departments,
one of the options would be adopting a joint solution, which would be
expected to facilitate the seamless transition of active-duty service
members to veteran status, and make inpatient health care data on
shared patients more readily accessible to both DOD and VA. In
addition, the departments believe that a joint development effort could
enable them to realize cost savings; however, no decision on a joint
system has yet been made. According to the departments, they expect to
receive recommendations on possible approaches at the end of July 2008.
In our previous work (see Related GAO Products), we pointed out that in
view of the many tasks and challenges associated with the departments'
long-term goal of seamless sharing of health information, it was
essential that the departments develop a comprehensive project plan to
guide these efforts to completion. Accordingly, in 2004, we recommended
that the departments develop such a plan for the CHDR interface and
that it include a work breakdown structure and schedule for all
development, testing, and implementation tasks.[Footnote 23]
Subsequently, the departments began work on the short-term initiatives
described, and we raised concerns regarding how all these initiatives
were to be incorporated into an overall strategy toward achieving the
departments' goal of a comprehensive, seamless exchange of health
information.
In response to our concerns, the departments began to develop such a
comprehensive plan, which they called the DOD/VA Information
Interoperability Plan. To provide input to the plan and determine
priorities, in December 2007, the departments established the Joint
Clinical Information Board, made up of senior clinical leaders from
both departments. The board is responsible for establishing clinical
priorities for electronic data sharing between the departments,
determining essential health information to be shared, and further
identifying and prioritizing data that should be viewable and data that
should be computable.
The departments produced a draft DOD/VA Information Interoperability
Plan in March 2008. According to DOD and VA officials, the draft
defines the technical and managerial processes necessary to satisfy the
departments' requirements and guide their activities to completion.
According to these officials, review of this draft by senior DOD and VA
officials is currently ongoing and is scheduled to be completed by
August 2008.
DOD and VA Are Currently Sharing Health Information at Different Levels
of Interoperability, but More Work Remains to Share All Health
Information:
DOD and VA have established and implemented mechanisms for electronic
sharing of health information, some of which is exchanged in computable
form, while other information is viewable only. However, not all
electronic health information is yet shared (for example, immunization
records and history, data on exposure to health hazards, and
psychological health treatment and care records). Further, although
VA's health information is all captured electronically, not all health
data collected by DOD are electronic--many DOD medical facilities use
paper-based health records.
Computable data. Data in computable form are exchanged through the CHDR
interface, which links the modernized health data repositories for the
new systems that each department is developing. Implementing the
interface required the departments to agree on standards for various
types of data, put the data into the agreed standard formats, and
populate the repositories with the standardized data.[Footnote 24]
Currently, the types of computable health data being exchanged are
limited to outpatient pharmacy and drug allergy data. The next type of
data to be standardized, included in the repositories, and exchanged is
laboratory data.[Footnote 25]
These data are not shared for all patients--only those who are seen at
both DOD and VA medical facilities, identified as shared patients, and
then "activated."[Footnote 26] Once a patient is activated, all DOD and
VA sites can access information on that patient and receive alerts on
allergies and drug interactions for that patient. According to DOD and
VA officials, outpatient pharmacy and drug allergy data were being
exchanged on more than 18,300 shared patients as of June 2008; however,
officials stated that they are unable to track the number of shared
patients currently receiving care from both departments, so the number
of patients for whom data could potentially be shared is unknown.
Viewable data. Data in viewable form are shared through the BHIE
interface. Through BHIE, clinicians can query selected health
information on patients from all VA and DOD sites and view current data
onscreen almost immediately. Because the BHIE interface provides access
to up-to-date information, the departments' clinicians expressed strong
interest in expanding its use. As a result, the departments decided to
broaden the capability and expand its implementation. For example, the
departments completed a BHIE interface with DOD's Clinical Data
Repository in July 2007, and they began sharing viewable patient vital
signs information through BHIE in June 2008. Extending BHIE
connectivity could provide both departments with the ability to view
additional data in DOD's legacy systems, until such time as the
departments' modernized systems are fully developed and implemented.
According to a DOD/VA annual report[Footnote 27] and program officials,
the departments now consider BHIE an interim step in their overall
strategy to create a two-way exchange of electronic health records.
Table 1 summarizes the types of health data currently shared via the
departments' various initiatives (including FHIE and LDSI), as well as
additional types of data that are currently planned for sharing.
Table 3: Data Elements Made Available and Planned by DOD/VA
Initiatives:
Initiative: CHDR;
Data elements: Available: Outpatient pharmacy; Drug allergy;
Data elements: Planned: Laboratory data;
Interoperability level: Computable data;
Comments: Data are exchanged between one department's data repository
and the other's. As of June 2008, computable pharmacy and medication
allergy data were being exchanged on over 18,300 shared patients.
Initiative: BHIE, Bidirectional Health Information Exchange;
Data elements: Available: Outpatient pharmacy data; Drug and food
allergy information; Surgical pathology reports; Microbiology results;
Cytology reports; Chemistry and hematology reports; Laboratory orders;
Radiology text reports; Inpatient discharge summaries, emergency room
notes, inpatient consultation, operative reports, and history and
physical reports from CIS at 17 DOD sites (about 40% of inpatient beds)
and all VA sites; Provider notes; Procedures; Problem lists; Vital
signs;
Data elements: Planned: Scanned images and documents; Family history;
Social history; Other history questionnaires; Radiology images;
Psychological health treatment and care records; Rollout of CIS at
additional DOD sites; expansion to include additional CIS
documentation: initial evaluation notes, procedure notes, evaluation
and management notes, preoperative and postoperative evaluation notes;
Interoperability level: Structured, viewable data; Unstructured,
viewable data from scanned documents;
Comments: Data are not transferred but can be viewed; Limitations:
Inpatient data are available only from a portion of DOD inpatient
hospitals, not all military hospitals.
Initiative: FHIE, Federal Health Information Exchange;
Data elements: Available: Patient demographics; Laboratory results;
Radiology reports; Outpatient pharmacy information; Admission discharge
transfer data; Discharge summaries from CHCS[A]; Consult reports;
Allergies; Data from the DOD Standard Ambulatory Data Record; Pre-and
postdeployment health assessments; Postdeployment health reassessments;
Data elements: Planned: None;
Interoperability level: Structured, viewable data;
Comments: Noncomputable text data are transferred to VA and stored in
VA's FHIE database, making it accessible to all VA clinicians; One-way
batch transfer of text data from DOD to VA occurs weekly if discharged
patient has been referred to VA for treatment; otherwise monthly;
Limitations: Discharge summaries from CHCS only[A] are transferred, not
from other DOD systems (see table 2).
Initiative: LDSI, Laboratory Data Sharing Interface;
Data elements: Available: Laboratory orders; Laboratory results
(chemistry, hematology, toxicology, and serology at all LDSI sites;
anatomic pathology and microbiology at two localities);
Data elements: Planned: Additional sites as business need arises;
Interoperability level: Structured, viewable data;
Comments: Noncomputable text data are transferred and captured in the
individual's health record.
Source: GAO analysis of VA and DOD data.
[A] According to department officials, the discharge summary module of
CHCS is used at a limited number of sites.
[End of table]
As depicted in table 3, DOD and VA are sharing or plan to share a wide
range of health information; however, other health information that the
departments currently capture has not yet been addressed (for example,
immunization records and history and data on exposure to health
hazards). Further, although VA's health information is all captured
electronically, many DOD medical facilities continue to rely on paper
records. Also, clinical encounters for those enrolled in the military's
TRICARE health care program[Footnote 28] are not captured in DOD's
electronic health system unless care is received at a military
treatment facility.[Footnote 29]
According to the departments' officials, the DOD/VA Information
Interoperability Plan (targeted for approval in August 2008) is to
address these and other issues and define tasks required to guide the
development and implementation of interoperable, bidirectional, and
standards-based electronic health records and capabilities for military
and veteran beneficiaries. DOD and VA are in the process of finalizing
the plan, and we have not yet performed an assessment. However, if it
includes the essential elements needed to guide the departments in
achieving their long-term goal of seamless sharing of health
information, it could improve the prospects for the successful
achievement of this goal.
DOD and VA Have Adopted Standards to Allow Sharing and Are Taking Steps
to Follow Federal Standards, Which Continue to Evolve:
DOD and VA have agreed upon numerous common standards that allow them
to share health data, which include standards that are part of current
and emerging federal interoperability specifications. The foundation
built by this collaborative process has allowed DOD and VA to begin
sharing computable health data (the highest level of interoperability).
Continuing their historical involvement in efforts to agree upon
standards for the electronic exchange of clinical health information,
the departments are also participating in recent ongoing standards-
related initiatives led by the Office of the National Coordinator for
Health Information Technology (within the Department of Health and
Human Services). In addition, DOD is taking steps to arrange for
certification of its modernized health information system (a customized
commercial system) against current standards.
The standards agreed to by the two departments are listed in a jointly
published common set of interoperability standards called the Target
DOD/VA Health Standards Profile. This profile resulted from an effort
that took place beginning in 2001, in which the two departments
compared their individual standards profiles for compatibility and
began converging them. First developed in 2004, the Target Standards
Profile is updated annually and is used for reviewing joint DOD/VA
initiatives to ensure standards compliance. According to the
departments, they anticipate continued updates and revisions to the
Target Standards Profile as additional federal standards emerge and are
in varying stages of recognition and acceptance by HHS (as previously
presented in table 1).
The current version of the profile, dated September 2007, includes
federal standards (such as data standards established by the Food and
Drug Administration and security standards established by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology); industry standards (such as
wireless communications standards established by the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers and Web file sharing standards
established by the American National Standards Institute); and
international standards (such as SNOMED CT, which was mentioned
earlier, and security standards established by the International
Organization for Standardization). The profile also indicates which of
these standards support the HHS-recognized use cases and HITSP
interoperability specifications. For example, for clinical data on
allergy reactions, the departments agreed to use SNOMED CT codes
(mentioned previously), which are included as part of HITSP
interoperability specifications.
In particular, for the two kinds of data now being exchanged in
computable form through CHDR (pharmacy and allergy data), DOD and VA
adopted National Library of Medicine data standards for medications and
drug allergies,[Footnote 30] as well as SNOMED CT codes for allergy
reactions. According to officials, the departments rely on published
versions of the library standards, and they can also submit new terms
to the National Library of Medicine for inclusion in the standards.
Also, the departments can exchange a standardized allergy reaction as
long as it is mapped to a SNOMED CT code in each department's allergy
reaction file. If a coded term is not available in the files,
clinicians can exchange descriptions of allergy reactions in free text.
This standardization was a prerequisite for exchanging computable
medical information--an accomplishment that, according to the National
Coordinator for Health IT, has not yet been achieved in any other
sector.
Continuing the departments' historical involvement in efforts to agree
upon standards for the electronic exchange of clinical health
information, health officials from both DOD and VA participate as
members of the American Health Information Community and HITSP. For
example, the 18-member community includes high-level representatives
from both DOD (the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs)
and VA (the Director, Health Data and Informatics, Veterans Health
Administration). DOD and VA are members of the HITSP Board and are
actively working on several committees and groups (Provider Perspective
Technical Committee; Population Perspective Technical Committee;
Security, Privacy and Infrastructure Domain Technical Committee; Care
Management and Health Records Domain Technical Committee;
Administrative and Financial Domain Technical Committee; Harmonization
Committee; and Foundation Committee). The National Coordinator
indicated that such participation is important and stated that it would
not be advisable for DOD and VA to move significantly ahead of the
national standards initiative; if they did, the departments might have
to change the way their systems share information by adjusting them to
the national standards later, as the standards continue to evolve.
In addition, according to DOD officials, the department is taking steps
to ensure that the electronic health records produced by its modernized
health information system, AHLTA, which is a customized commercial
software application, are compliant with standards by arranging for
certification through the Certification Commission for Healthcare
Information Technology. Specifically, version 3.3 of AHLTA, which is
still undergoing beta testing,[Footnote 31] was conditionally certified
in April 2007 against 2006 outpatient electronic health record criteria
established by the commission. DOD officials stated that AHLTA version
3.3 has been installed at three DOD locations[Footnote 32] for beta
testing and has met specific functionality, interoperability, and
security requirements. The commission cannot fully certify this version
of AHLTA until it has verified that the system has been in operational
use at a medical site.
The departments' efforts to share data and to be involved in
standardization activities are important mechanisms for ensuring that
their electronic health records are both interoperable and aligned with
emerging standards and specifications.
DOD and VA Have Taken Steps to Establish the Joint Interagency Program
Office, but the Office Does Not Yet Have Permanent Leadership, Staff,
or Facilities:
To accelerate the departments' ongoing interoperability efforts,
Congress included provisions establishing a joint interagency program
office in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.
Under the act, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs were required to jointly develop schedules and benchmarks for
setting up the DOD/VA Interagency Program Office, as well as for other
activities for achieving interoperable health information (that is,
establishing system requirements, acquisition and testing, and
implementation of interoperable electronic health records or
capabilities). The schedules and benchmarks were due 30 days after
passage of the act (February 28, 2008).
The departments developed a draft implementation plan defining fiscal
years 2008 and 2009 schedules and milestones; the date of the draft was
April 25--almost 2 months after the due date. In the effort to set up
the program office, the departments appointed an Acting Director from
DOD and an Acting Deputy Director from VA on April 17, 2008.[Footnote
33] According to the Acting Director, they have also detailed staff and
provided temporary space and equipment to a transition team.
According to this official, through the efforts of the transition team,
the departments are currently developing a charter for the office,
defining and approving an organizational structure, and preparing to
begin recruiting permanent staff for the office, who are expected to
number about 30. According to the implementation plan, the departments
expect to appoint a permanent Director and Deputy and begin recruiting
staff by October 2008. According to the Acting Director, program staff
are expected to be in place, and the office is expected to be fully
operational by December 2008. According to the departments, $4.94
million was requested to fund the office for fiscal year 2008, which is
expected to be received this July. Funding requirements of $6.94
million for fiscal year 2009 were submitted in June.
The draft implementation plan includes schedules and milestones for
achieving interoperable health information in two stages. The first
stage--Interoperability I, to be completed by September 2008--is to
address those health data most commonly required by health care
providers, as validated by the Joint Clinical Information
Board.[Footnote 34] The first milestone for Interoperability I, sharing
vital signs information, has been achieved. The remaining milestones
(sharing questionnaires and forms, family history, social history, and
other history) are all due September 2008.
The second stage--Interoperability II, to be completed by September
2009--is to address additional health information enhancements.
However, the information to be covered by these enhancements has not
yet been fully defined, and milestone dates are not fully established:
* According to the plan, the requirements for the Interoperability II
enhancements are to be validated by the Joint Clinical Information
Board, which sets the clinical priorities for what electronic health
information should be shared next. This validation, followed by
approval by senior department leadership, was to be complete by June
2008. However, according to department officials, the completion date
is now expected to be the end of July 2008.
* Of 52 milestone dates for Interoperability II, 19 are yet to be
determined. For example, milestone dates have not been identified
regarding capabilities to share data on exposures to health hazards,
immunization records and history, family history, and psychological
health treatment and care records.
Officials stated that decisions on these milestone dates will depend on
clinical priorities, technical considerations, and policy decisions.
For example, the exchange of psychological health treatment and care
records requires policy decisions regarding appropriate access.
Further, according to the implementation plan draft, the plan is
intended to serve as a "living document" that will be updated and
refined as more detailed information becomes known on planned fiscal
year 2008 and fiscal year 2009 initiatives, and as health care
information needs change.
According to the Acting Director, the draft implementation plan has not
been finalized because of remaining uncertainties regarding such issues
as space and staffing needs. For example, although the scope of the
office's responsibility is to be for electronic health records and
capabilities, the departments' leadership may broaden its scope to
include sharing of personnel and benefits data, which would affect the
number of staff required. However, although the implementation plan (as
a planning tool) is appropriately a living document, it is nonetheless
important to complete the planning and make the decisions needed to
finalize the initial plan, particularly in view of the fast approaching
September 2009 deadline.
Further, according to department officials, the joint interagency
program office will play a crucial role in coordinating the
departments' efforts to accelerate their interoperability efforts. An
important aspect of this coordination will be managing the further
development and implementation of the DOD/VA Information
Interoperability Plan, currently under review by senior management.
According to these officials, having a centralized office to take on
this role will be a primary benefit. However, the effort to set up the
program office is still in its early stages. The positions of Director
and Deputy Director are not yet permanently filled, permanent staff
have not yet been hired, and facilities have not yet been designated
for housing the office. Until the program office is fully established,
it will not be able to play this crucial role effectively.
Conclusions:
DOD and VA are currently sharing more health information than ever
before, including exchanging some at the highest level of
interoperability, that is, in computable form. The departments also
have efforts under way to share additional information. Additional
issues remaining to be addressed include electronic sharing of the
information in paper-based health records and the completion of their
long-range plans to develop fully interoperable health information
systems. According to the departments, the DOD/VA Information
Interoperability Plan is to address these and other issues. Once the
plan is finalized and approved by DOD and VA officials, we intend to
perform an assessment of the plan. However, if the plan includes the
essential elements needed to guide the departments in achieving their
long-term goal of seamless sharing of health information, it could
improve the prospects for the successful achievement of this goal.
Further enhancing interoperability depends on adherence to common
standards. The two departments have agreed on standards and are working
with each other and federal groups to help ensure that their systems
are both interoperable and compliant with current and emerging federal
standards.
The joint interagency program office is to play a crucial role in
accelerating the departments' efforts to achieve electronic health
records and capabilities that allow for full interoperability. However,
it is not expected to be fully set up until the end of the year, after
which only 9 months will remain to meet the goal of full
interoperability between the departments by September 2009. The
implementation plan, which was almost 2 months late, remains in draft,
with many milestone dates yet to be determined. In view of the short
timeframes, without a fully established program office and a finalized
implementation plan with set milestones, the departments may be
challenged in meeting the required date for achieving interoperable
electronic health records and capabilities.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To better ensure that the effort by DOD and VA to achieve fully
interoperable electronic health record systems or capabilities is
accelerated, we recommend that the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans
Affairs give priority to fully establishing the Joint Interagency
Program Office by expediting efforts to:
* put in place permanent leadership, staff, and facilities and:
* make the necessary decisions to finalize the draft implementation
plan.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In providing written comments on a draft of this report, the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs agreed with our recommendations. (The departments' comments are
reproduced in app.II and app. III, respectively.) DOD stated that high
priority will be given to fully establishing the Joint Interagency
Program Office, with specific focus on expanding efforts related to
permanent leadership, staff, and facilities. DOD also provided
technical comments on the draft report, which we incorporated as
appropriate.
VA's comments described actions planned or being taken that respond to
our recommendations. For example, according to VA, the Deputy Director
of the Interagency Program Office is expected to be appointed by
October 2008. In addition, VA stated that the departments
collaboratively determined the number and type of staff required for
the new office and expect to hire permanent staff by December 2008. In
this regard, DOD has taken the lead on securing permanent facilities
for the program office and is currently working with the General
Services Administration to find suitable space. In addition, VA stated
the departments are in the process of finalizing the implementation
plan and that by October 31, 2008, they expect to identify the
milestones and timelines for defining requirements to support
interoperable health records. The department noted that the Joint
Clinical Information Board is expected to identify, by July 31, 2008,
the specific data types and format for sharing that must be achieved by
September 2009. If the actions planned or currently under way are
properly implemented, they should help ensure that DOD and VA will be
successful in meeting their goals for sharing interoperable health
information.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Veterans
Affairs and Defense, appropriate congressional committees, and other
interested parties. We will also make copies available to others upon
request. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO
Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staffs have questions about this report, please contact
me at (202) 512-6304 or [email protected]. Contact points for our Offices
of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last
page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in
appendix IV.
Signed by:
Valerie C. Melvin:
Director, Human Capital and Management Information Systems Issues:
List of Congressional Committees:
The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye:
Chairman:
The Honorable Ted Stevens:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Defense:
Committee on Appropriations:
United States Senate:
The Honorable John P. Murtha:
Chairman:
The Honorable C.W. Bill Young:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Defense:
Committee on Appropriations:
United States House of Representatives:
The Honorable Tim Johnson:
Chairman:
The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs, and Related
Agencies:
Committee on Appropriations:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Chet Edwards:
Chairman:
The Honorable Zach Wamp:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs, and Related
Agencies:
Committee on Appropriations:
United States House of Representatives:
The Honorable Carl Levin:
Chairman:
The Honorable John McCain:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Ike Skelton:
Chairman:
The Honorable Duncan Hunter:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
United States House of Representatives:
The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka:
Chairman:
The Honorable Richard M. Burr:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Veterans' Affairs:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Bob Filner:
Chairman:
The Honorable Steve Buyer:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Veterans' Affairs:
United States House of Representatives:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To describe the progress of the Department of Defense (DOD) and
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to date on developing electronic
health records systems or capabilities that allow for full
interoperability of personal health care information between the
departments, we reviewed our previous work on DOD and VA efforts to
develop health information systems, interoperable health records, and
interoperability standards to be implemented in federal health care
programs. Additionally, we reviewed information gathered from agency
documentation and interviews with cognizant DOD and VA officials
relating to the departments' efforts to share electronic health
information. Further, we visited a DOD military treatment facility and
a VA medical center (Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the
Washington, D.C., VA Medical Center), chosen because they were
accessible and allowed us to observe the sharing capabilities and
functionality of the two departments' electronic health information
systems.
To describe steps taken by the departments to ensure that their health
records comply with applicable interoperability standards,
implementation specifications, and certification criteria of the
federal government, we analyzed information gathered from DOD and VA
documentation and interviews pertaining to the interoperability
standards and implementation specifications that the two departments
have agreed to for exchanging health information via their health care
information systems. We reviewed documentation and interviewed agency
officials from the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of
the National Coordinator for Health Information technology to obtain
information regarding the defined federal interoperability standards,
implementation specifications, and certification criteria. We also
reviewed documentation and interviewed DOD and VA officials from the
Joint Clinical Information Board to determine the extent to which the
departments have adopted federal interoperability standards,
implementation specifications, and certification criteria.
To describe efforts to set up the joint interagency program office, we
analyzed documentation regarding the establishment of the office and
interviewed responsible officials.
We conducted this performance audit at VA and DOD sites in the greater
Washington, D.C., metropolitan area from March 2008 through July 2008
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense:
The Assistant Secretary Of Defense:
1200 Defense Pentagon:
Washington, DC 20301-1200:
July 22, 2008:
Ms. Valerie C. Melvin:
Director, Human Capital and Management Information Systems Issues:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Ms. Melvin:
This is the Department of Defense's (DoD) response to the
recommendations enclosed in the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
Draft Report, "Electronic Health Records: DOD and VA Have Increased
Their Sharing of Health Information, but More Work Remains," dated July
14, 2008 (GAO-08-954).
DoD acknowledges receipt of the draft audit report and concurs with the
overall findings and recommendations. We have provided several
suggested technical corrections in the enclosed formal response-
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft
report. My points of contact for additional information are Ms. Lois
Kellett, who may be reached at, (703) 681-9530, or
[email protected], and Mr. Gunther Zimmerman, who may be reached
at, (703) 681-4360, or [email protected].
Sincerely,
Signed by: Stephen L. Jones, for:
S. Ward Casscells, MD:
Enclosure: As stated:
Government Accountability Office Draft Report-Dated July 14, 2008
"Electronic Health Records: DOD and VA Have Increased Their Sharing Of
Health Information, But More Work Remains" (Project No. GAO-08-954):
Department of Defense Concurrence:
Recommendation 1: The Government Accountability Office (GAO)
recommended that the Secretary of Defense give priority to fully
establishing the Joint Interagency Program Office by expanding efforts
to put in place permanent leadership, staff, and facilities. (p. 31/GAO
Draft Report)
DoD Response: Concur. The Department of Defense (DoD) will continue to
give high priority to fully establishing the Joint Interagency Program
Office, with specific focus on expanding efforts related to permanent
leadership, staff, and facilities.
Recommendation 2: The GAO recommended that the Secretary of Defense
give priority to fully establishing the Joint Interagency Program
Office by expanding efforts to make the necessary decisions to finalize
the draft implementation plan. (p. 32/GAO Draft Report)
DoD Response: Concur. DoD will give high priority to fully establishing
the Joint Interagency Program Office, with specific focus on expanding
efforts to make the necessary decisions to finalize the draft
implementation plan.
[End of section]
Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs:
The Secretary Of Veterans Affairs:
Washington:
July 18, 2008:
Ms. Valerie Melvin:
Director:
Information Technology:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, NW:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Ms. Melvin:
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has reviewed your draft report,
Electronic Health Records: DOD and VA Have Increased Their Sharing of
Health Information, but More Work Remains (GAO-08-954), and agrees with
its conclusions and concurs with its recommendations.
VA and the Department of Defense (DoD) have made significant progress
in complying with the requirements of the National Defense
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2008- The Interagency Program Office
(IPO) was established, and an Acting Director and Deputy Director were
appointed, temporary staff has been detailed to the office and
temporary space and equipment have been provided. VA expects to appoint
a permanent Deputy Director by October 2008, and hire permanent program
staff by December 2008- On April 25, 2008, the IPO submitted to
Congress a draft Implementation Plan discussing planned activities to
achieve interoperable health records by September 2009.
Although we have made significant progress to date, VA acknowledges
that there are difficult challenges ahead of us. VA and DoD leadership
remain committed to the sharing of electronic health information and
fully expects to achieve this objective by September 2009.
The enclosure addresses GAO's recommendations. VA appreciates the
opportunity to comment on your draft report.
Sincerely yours,
Signed by:
James B. Peake, M.D.
Enclosure:
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Comments to Government
Accountability Office (GAO) Draft Report, Electronic Health Records:
DOD and VA Have Increased Their Sharing of Health Information, but More
Work Remains (GAO-08-954):
To better ensure that the effort by DOD and VA to achieve fully
interoperable electronic health record systems or capabilities is
accelerate, GAO recommend that the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans
Affairs give priority to fully establishing the Joint Interagency
Program Office by expediting efforts to:
* Put in place permanent leadership, staff, and facilities.
Concur - Under the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal year
2008 the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
were required to jointly develop schedules and benchmarks for setting
up the Department of Defense (DoD)/Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Interagency Program Office (IPO). VA/DoD developed a draft
implementation plan defining fiscal year 2008 and 2009 schedules and
milestones. In the effort to set up the IPO, VA/DoD appointed an Acting
Director from DoD and an Acting Deputy Director from VA on April 17,
2008- VA/DoD have detailed temporary staff and provided temporary space
and equipment.
In order to fully implement the IPO, VA/DoD considered several key
decisions regarding permanent the IPO structure and scope. The IPO was
placed under the governance of the DoD/VA Joint Executive Council.
VA/DoD have also agreed to what the IPO scope of responsibilities
should be over the next 9 to 12 months. These key decisions enabled the
departments to complete staffing plans and conduct physical space
planning for the permanent IPO structure.
To date, the departments have completed and approved a staffing plan
and staff organization chart. VA and DoD worked collaboratively to
determine the number and type of staff required to man this new office
and have developed position descriptions. Those position descriptions
were submitted to the human resources office at the end of June- Human
Resources is classifying the position and once complete will issue job
announcements. VA anticipates that the positions will be approved for
hiring actions no later than August 2008. VA expects to appoint a
permanent Deputy Director by October 2008, and hire permanent program
staff by December 2008.
Once the staff issues (as to numbers and types) had been dealt with
then the space requirement could be developed. DoD has taken the lead
on securing the permanent facilities to house the new program office
and are currently working with the General Services Administration to
find suitable space.
The IPO meets three times every week and has established a standing
agenda that includes tracking hiring actions, locating permanent
physical space for the IPO, and development of key IPO documents.
* Make the necessary decisions to finalize the draft implementation
plan.
Concur - The purpose of the DoD/VA Information Interoperability Plan
(targeted for approval in August 2008) is to define tasks required to
guide the development and implementation of interoperable,
bidirectional, and standards-based electronic health records and
capabilities for military and veteran beneficiaries. DoD and VA are in
the process of finalizing the plan.
On April 25, 2008, the IPO submitted to Congress a draft Implementation
Plan discussing planned activities to achieve interoperable health
records by September 2009. VA/DoD have formed the Joint Clinical
Information Board (JCIB) to ensure that clinicians treating patients
determine the key information that must be interoperable by September
2009. The JCIB has validated that the information currently shared
meets the Dole-Shalala target to share essential information in
viewable format. Additionally, VA and DoD anticipate that by July 31,
2008, the JCIB will have identified the specific data types and format
for sharing that must be achieved by September 2009 for interoperable
electronic health records. By August 31, 2008, VA and DoD will obtain
formal approval from the Health Executive Council on the data elements
identified by the JCIB. By October 31, 2008, VA and DoD will identify
the milestones and timelines for requirements definition to support
interoperable health records. The JCIB's findings and subsequent
requirements activities will be used to update the Implementation Plan-
The JCIB has determined that not all information needs to be shared in
computable format. JCIB is determining what must be computable and what
will be shared beyond September 2009 and this will provide the
framework for completion of the Implementation Plan.
VA/DoD will meet the target identified by the Dole-Shalala commission
to share essential health information in viewable format by October
2008 when we begin sharing family and social history information on
patients. Essential health information currently shared includes
outpatient pharmacy and allergy information, outpatient and inpatient
laboratory orders and results, radiology reports, progress reports and
inpatient information such as discharge summaries, operative reports
and consults from key DoD military treatment facilities, and vital
signs. DoD also sends clinical theater information which is available
to all VA hospitals and scanned inpatient records and radiology images
from key military treatment facilities to the VA polytrauma centers. VA
and DoD are working on expanding a bidirectional image sharing pilot
and are finalizing an enterprise-wide plan for sharing images that will
be delivered on October 2008.
[End of section]
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
Valerie C. Melvin, (202) 512-6304 or [email protected]:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the contact named above, key contributions were made to
this report by Barbara S. Oliver (Assistant Director), Barbara Collier,
Kelly Shaw, and Robert Williams, Jr.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
VA and DOD Health Care: Progress Made on Implementation of 2003
President's Task Force Recommendations on Collaboration and
Coordination, but More Remains to Be Done. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-495R]. Washington, D.C.: April
30, 2008.
Health Information Technology: HHS Is Pursuing Efforts to Advance
Nationwide Implementation, but Has Not Yet Completed a National
Strategy. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-499T].
Washington, D.C.: February 14, 2008.
Information Technology: VA and DOD Continue to Expand Sharing of
Medical Information, but Still Lack Comprehensive Electronic Medical
Records. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-207T].
Washington, D.C.: October 24, 2007.
Veterans Affairs: Progress Made in Centralizing Information Technology
Management, but Challenges Persist. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-
bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1246T]. Washington, D.C.: September 19, 2007.
Information Technology: VA and DOD Are Making Progress in Sharing
Medical Information, but Remain Far from Having Comprehensive
Electronic Medical Records. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-
bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1108T]. Washington, D.C.: July 18, 2007.
Health Information Technology: Efforts Continue but Comprehensive
Privacy Approach Needed for National Strategy. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-988T]. Washington, D.C.: June
19, 2007.
Information Technology: VA and DOD Are Making Progress in Sharing
Medical Information, but Are Far from Comprehensive Electronic Medical
Records. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-852T].
Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2007.
DOD and VA Outpatient Pharmacy Data: Computable Data Are Exchanged for
Some Shared Patients, but Additional Steps Could Facilitate Exchanging
These Data for All Shared Patients. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-
bin/getrpt?GAO-07-554R]. Washington, D.C.: April 30, 2007.
Health Information Technology: Early Efforts Initiated but
Comprehensive Privacy Approach Needed for National Strategy.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-400T]. Washington,
D.C.: February 1, 2007.
Health Information Technology: Early Efforts Initiated, but
Comprehensive Privacy Approach Needed for National Strategy.[hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-238]. Washington, D.C.:
January 10, 2007.
Health Information Technology: HHS is Continuing Efforts to Define Its
National Strategy. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-
1071T]. Washington, D.C.: September 1, 2006.
Information Technology: VA and DOD Face Challenges in Completing Key
Efforts. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-905T].
Washington, D.C.: June 22, 2006.
Health Information Technology: HHS Is Continuing Efforts to Define a
National Strategy. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-
346T]. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2006.
Computer-Based Patient Records: VA and DOD Made Progress, but Much Work
Remains to Fully Share Medical Information. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-1051T]. Washington, D.C.:
September 28, 2005.
Health Information Technology: HHS Is Taking Steps to Develop a
National Strategy. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-
628]. Washington, D.C.: May 27, 2005.
Computer-Based Patient Records: VA and DOD Efforts to Exchange Health
Data Could Benefit from Improved Planning and Project Management.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-687]. Washington,
D.C.: June 7, 2004.
Computer-Based Patient Records: Improved Planning and Project
Management Are Critical to Achieving Two-Way VA-DOD Health Data
Exchange. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-811T].
Washington, D.C.: May 19, 2004.
Computer-Based Patient Records: Sound Planning and Project Management
Are Needed to Achieve a Two-Way Exchange of VA and DOD Health Data.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-402T]. Washington,
D.C.: March 17, 2004.
Computer-Based Patient Records: Short-Term Progress Made, but Much Work
Remains to Achieve a Two-Way Data Exchange Between VA and DOD Health
Systems. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-271T].
Washington, D.C.: November 19, 2003.
VA Information Technology: Management Making Important Progress in
Addressing Key Challenges. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-
bin/getrpt?GAO-02-1054T]. Washington, D.C.: September 26, 2002.
Veterans Affairs: Sustained Management Attention Is Key to Achieving
Information Technology Results. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-
bin/getrpt?GAO-02-703]. Washington, D.C.: June 12, 2002.
VA Information Technology: Progress Made, but Continued Management
Attention Is Key to Achieving Results. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-369T]. Washington, D.C.: March
13, 2002.
VA and Defense Health Care: Military Medical Surveillance Policies in
Place, but Implementation Challenges Remain. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-478T]. Washington, D.C.:
February 27, 2002.
VA and Defense Health Care: Progress Made, but DOD Continues to Face
Military Medical Surveillance System Challenges. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-377T]. Washington, D.C.:
January 24, 2002.
VA and Defense Health Care: Progress and Challenges DOD Faces in
Executing a Military Medical Surveillance System. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-173T]. Washington, D.C.:
October 16, 2001.
Computer-Based Patient Records: Better Planning and Oversight by VA,
DOD, and IHS Would Enhance Health Data Sharing. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-01-459]. Washington, D.C.: April
30, 2001.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] In 1996, the Presidential Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans'
Illnesses reported on many deficiencies in VA's and DOD's data
capabilities for handling service members' health information. In
November 1997, the President called for the two agencies to start
developing a "comprehensive, lifelong medical record for each service
member," and in August 1998, issued a directive requiring VA and DOD to
develop a "computer-based patient record system that will accurately
and efficiently exchange information."
[2] We recently testified that DOD and VA have only partially achieved
the goal of developing interoperable electronic health records. GAO,
Information Technology: VA and DOD Continue to Expand Sharing of
Medical Information, but Still Lack Comprehensive Electronic Medical
Records, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-207T]
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 24, 2007).
[3] The commission recommended that DOD and VA work toward a "fully
interoperable information system that will meet the long-term
administrative and clinical needs of all military personnel over time."
[4] The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, Pub.
L. No. 110-181, Section 1635, required "Fully Interoperable Electronic
Personal Health Information for the Department of Defense and the
Department of Veterans Affairs."
[5] Interoperability is the ability of two or more systems or
components to exchange information and to use the information that has
been exchanged. Further discussion of levels of interoperability is
provided later in this report.
[6] See Related GAO Products at the end of this report for previous GAO
reports and testimonies on DOD/VA health information sharing and
national health information technology issues.
[7] These initiatives include identifying relevant existing standards,
identifying overlaps and gaps in the standards, developing
recommendations to address overlaps and gaps, and developing
interoperability specifications and certification criteria based on
these standards.
[8] GAO, Health Information Technology: HHS Is Pursuing Efforts to
Advance Nationwide Implementation, but Has Not Yet Completed a National
Strategy, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-499T]
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 14, 2008).
[9] An electronic health record is a longitudinal collection of
information about the health of an individual or the care provided,
such as patient demographics, progress notes, problems, medications,
vital signs, past medical history, immunizations, laboratory data, and
radiology reports.
[10] Executive Order 13335, Incentives for the Use of Health
Information Technology and Establishing the Position of the National
Health Information Technology Coordinator (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 27,
2004).
[11] Use cases are descriptions of events that detail what a system (or
systems) needs to do to achieve a specific mission or goal; they convey
how individuals and organizations (actors) interact with the systems.
For health IT, use cases strive to provide enough detail and context
for follow-up activities to occur, such as standards harmonization,
architecture specification, certification consideration, and detailed
policy discussions to advance the national health IT agenda.
[12] The American National Standards Institute is a private, nonprofit
organization whose mission is to promote and facilitate voluntary
consensus standards and ensure their integrity.
[13] IS 01, Interoperability Specification for Electronic Health Record
Laboratory Results Reporting.
[14] SNOMED CT, a comprehensive health and clinical terminology, was
established by the International Health Terminology Standards
Development Organisation, a not-for-profit association that develops
and promotes use of SNOMED CT so as to support safe and effective
health information exchange.
[15] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-499T].
[16] GAO, Health Information Technology: HHS Is Taking Steps to Develop
a National Strategy, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-
05-628] (Washington, D.C.: May 27, 2005). See also Related GAO Products
at the end of this report.
[17] GAO, Computer-Based Patient Records: Better Planning and Oversight
by VA, DOD, and IHS Would Enhance Health Data Sharing, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-01-459] (Washington, D.C.: Apr.
30, 2001) and Veterans Affairs: Sustained Management Attention Is Key
to Achieving Information Technology Results, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-703] (Washington, D.C.: June
12, 2002).
[18] GAO, Information Technology: VA and DOD Are Making Progress in
Sharing Medical Information, but Are Far from Comprehensive Electronic
Medical Records, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-
852T] (Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2007); and [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-207T].
[19] To create BHIE, the departments drew on the architecture and
framework of the information transfer system established by the FHIE
project. Unlike FHIE, which provides a one-way transfer of information
to VA when a service member separates from the military, the two-way
interface allows clinicians in both departments to view, in real time,
limited health data (in text form) from the departments' existing
health information systems.
[20] AHLTA was formerly known as CHCS II.
[21] The name CHDR, pronounced "cheddar," combines the names of the two
repositories.
[22] The contract for this study is still ongoing.
[23] GAO, Computer-Based Patient Records: VA and DOD Efforts to
Exchange Health Data Could Benefit from Improved Planning and Project
Management, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-687]
(Washington, D.C.: June 7, 2004).
[24] DOD has populated CDR with information for outpatient encounters,
drug allergies, and order entries and results for outpatient pharmacy
and lab orders. VA has populated HDR with patient demographics, vital
signs records, allergy data, and outpatient pharmacy data; in July
2007, the department added chemistry and hematology, and in September
2007, added microbiology.
[25] Standardizing the data involves different tasks for each
department. That is, although VA's health records are already
electronic, it must still convert them into the standardized format
appropriate for its repository. DOD must convert and standardize
current records from its multiple systems, but it must also address
health records that are not automated.
[26] That is, they are matched on certain identifiers--first name, last
name, date of birth, Social Security number--in both agencies' health
information systems and established as "active" shared patients.
[27] December 2004 DOD and VA Joint Strategic Plan.
[28] Those eligible are active-duty service members, National Guard and
Reserve members, retirees, their families, survivors and certain former
spouses.
[29] According to DOD officials, about 7.29 million individuals are
enrolled in TRICARE. These people can seek care in both the direct care
system (military medical facilities) and the purchased care system
(nonmilitary medical facilities).
[30] These data standards are known as RxNorm and Unified Medical
Language System (UMLS) for medications and drug allergies.
[31] Beta testing is testing of a prerelease version of software by
selected cooperating users.
[32] These sites are the Naval Medical Center in Portsmouth, Va.;
Eisenhower Army Medical Center in Fort Gordon, Ga.; and Goodfellow Air
Force Base in San Angelo, Tex.
[33] Before these appointments, both the officials had been involved in
the planning and implementation of the departments' current sharing
capabilities.
[34] These data were defined in response to the recommendation by the
President's Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded
Warriors.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: [email protected]:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, [email protected]:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected]:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
*** End of document. ***