presented by: rebecca coyle, aira executive director · •aira in conjunction with aim sought...

Presented by:

Rebecca Coyle, AIRA Executive

Director

• The purpose of this presentation is to:

Update the Program Mangers on the

outcome of a meeting that was held in

September.

Provide highlights of that meeting.

Provide a timeline for the final outcome.

• AIRA in conjunction with AIM sought subject matter experts (SMEs) to attend a one-day meeting in St. Paul, Minnesota in late September to help identify benefits and barriers to implementing dose level accountability.

• Goals of the session were to: • Identify and rank barriers to capturing dose level

eligibility

• Identify possible benefits of capturing dose level eligibility

• Suggest candidate mitigating strategies to the identified barriers

• Eligibility can be captured at the dose level, the visit level, or the patient level

• Capturing at the dose level offers flexibility to “roll up” to other levels as needed

• The AIRA MIROW workgroup and IIS Functional Standards (pending NVAC approval) both recommended this change •Now in IPOM/annual grant for 2013-2017

• During the facilitated session,

participants:

listed 32 potential benefits of capturing

dose level eligibility

identified a total of 68 perceived barriers to

implementing dose level eligibility

• Michigan presented on the most

significant benefit they have

encountered:

• They could verify that their 317

immunization program was adequately

funded to meet vaccine needs.

•And it also let them more tightly monitor

providers for possible fraud and abuse

• Participants ranked the barriers according to criticality and level of difficulty, and identified 17 of the total list of barriers as being both highly critical and extremely difficult to overcome.

• Barriers were then categorized Policy – The issue requires a new policy, policy

clarification or project prioritization at either the federal or state level

Technical – The barrier is related to limitations of the existing IIS and/or EHR systems

Resource – The issue is affected by limited resources such as available staff, funding and/or time

Flow – The barrier is related to a business process flow issue at either the state or provider level

7

5

2

2 1

Technical

Resources

Policy

Technical/Flow

Resources/Flow

• Broadly speaking, candidate mitigations followed a few central themes. These included: • involvement by CDC,

•addressing inadequate funding and resource availability,

• standardizing approaches by developing and applying guidelines and policies to address issues with inconsistencies, and

• support from national organizations like AIRA and PHII to provide best practices and guidance

Standardization and Development of

Guidelines and Policies

• Barrier: inconsistencies in how EHRs

document and transmit eligibility to the IIS

• Suggestion: state IIS could work with providers to ensure they use standardized code sets. This

would require the development of a national

code set—something that might be done

through a national organization like AIRA, AIM

or PHII.

• The session results provide interesting findings about what

participants saw as the most significant barriers—the

“showstoppers”—for implementing dose level eligibility.

• However, the showstoppers are balanced with the

benefits they also see as possible from such an

implementation. These benefits may be a motivating

force behind driving IIS to implement dose level eligibility.

• Equally interesting were the mitigating strategies. When

mitigating strategies are viewed by who is impacted and

who can drive the mitigation, they can inform

stakeholders of actions they may wish to take to

overcome some of these showstopper barriers.

• AIRA has received a draft white paper

that the staff are editing

•Additional edits will be made

• The white paper will be formatted and

distributed to Program Managers, IIS

Managers, and VFC Managers…and of

course available on our website

• The results of the facilitated session are to document the benefits and barriers to implementing dose level accountability, and

• Contribute to a growing body of knowledge that can inform stakeholders of next steps toward successful implementation of dose level accountability.