This Is Due On Tuesday February 7, 2017, 11:59 Pm Midnight

This Is Due On Tuesday February 72017 1159 Pmmidnightfreshly Done

This assignment requires an analysis of the information technology (IT) framework within a Managed Care Organization (MCO). Specifically, it involves defining the key elements of an information system tailored for an MCO, comparing these with systems used in physician offices or groups, describing the technological requirements necessary for full operational capacity, proposing a HIPAA-compliant electronic health record (EHR) or electronic medical record (EMR) program, and evaluating the financial considerations including costs and projected savings. Additionally, the task involves analyzing the pros and cons of insourcing versus outsourcing IT functions and making a final recommendation based on this evaluation.

Paper For Above instruction

Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) are integral to the healthcare landscape, especially in coordinating services, managing costs, and maintaining quality of care for their covered populations. The role of information technology within an MCO is paramount, as it forms the backbone of operational efficiency, data management, compliance, and decision-making processes. The development of a robust IT infrastructure is essential to support the complex functions of an MCO, which include enrollment management, claims processing, provider networks, care coordination, member services, and compliance with health regulations such as HIPAA.

At the core of an MCO's information system are several key elements that enable seamless data flow and operational efficiency. These include a comprehensive claims payment system, a member management system, provider network management, clinical decision support tools, and analytics platforms. Unlike physician offices or small groups, MCOs require large-scale, integrated health management systems capable of handling vast amounts of data across multiple facilities and service providers. These systems must support interoperability standards to facilitate data exchange between different entities, ensuring a unified approach to patient care and administrative functions.

In contrast to smaller healthcare practices, which typically rely on localized electronic health records focused on individual patient encounters, MCOs need enterprise-wide solutions that integrate administrative and clinical data. This involves advanced database management systems, sophisticated interoperability protocols (such as HL7 and FHIR standards), and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems that coordinate financial, administrative, and clinical operations. A pivotal part of their technological infrastructure is a HIPAA-compliant EHR or EMR system, critical for safeguarding patient information while facilitating effective clinical and administrative workflows.

For example, the MCO could implement an EHR system such as Epic's Clarity or Cerner Millennium, both of which are known for their compliance with HIPAA regulations and their capacity to support large, integrated health networks. These systems provide robust security features, audit trails, encrypted data transfer, and role-based access controls to ensure compliance with HIPAA. They also support data analytics, reporting, and decision support modules, which are invaluable for population health management, quality improvement, and regulatory compliance.

Regarding the functions, costs, and projected savings, the primary functions facilitated by a sophisticated IT system include efficient claims processing, provider credentialing, utilization management, member engagement tools, and compliance reporting. Initial costs for deploying such systems can be substantial, involving software licensing, hardware infrastructure, training, and ongoing maintenance. However, these investments can result in significant savings through reduced administrative overhead, decreased claim processing errors, improved billing cycles, and enhanced care coordination.

A typical cost analysis might estimate an initial investment of several million dollars, with annual expenses in the hundreds of thousands for updates, support, and compliance. Projected savings can include reduced administrative staffing costs, decreased fraud, waste, and abuse, and improved health outcomes that lower long-term expenditures. Enhanced data analytics can lead to better resource allocation, targeted interventions, and preventive care measures that further reduce costs.

When evaluating insourcing versus outsourcing IT operations, the strengths of insourcing include greater control over data security, tailored system integration, and immediate responsiveness to organizational needs. Conversely, outsourcing can provide access to specialized expertise, scalable solutions, and potentially lower operational costs by leveraging external vendor economies of scale. However, outsourcing may pose risks related to data security, loss of control, and dependency on external providers' stability and compliance standards.

After weighing these factors, a hybrid approach may be optimal. Critical functions such as data security, core clinical systems, and strategic planning can be insourced to maintain control and security, while non-core functions, like certain technical support or system maintenance, can be outsourced to specialized vendors. This approach balances the need for control with cost efficiencies and flexibility.

In conclusion, establishing a comprehensive, HIPAA-compliant IT infrastructure is crucial for the effective operation of an MCO. The system must incorporate integrated clinical, administrative, and analytical tools tailored to large-scale, multi-provider environments. Careful evaluation of insourcing versus outsourcing will determine the most strategic approach to maintaining data security, reducing costs, and enhancing operational efficiency. Strategic investments in robust IT systems are vital for improving patient outcomes, regulatory compliance, and financial sustainability of the MCO.

References

• Arnold, R. M., & Straus, S. E. (2018). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach it. Elsevier.
• Blumenthal, D., & Tavenner, M. (2010). The "Meaningful Use" regulation for electronic health records. New England Journal of Medicine, 363(6), 501-504.
• HIMSS. (2020). The impact of electronic health records on healthcare quality and efficiency. Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society.
• Kellermann, A. L., & Jones, S. S. (2013). What it will take to achieve the as-yet-unfulfilled promises of health information technology. Health Affairs, 32(1), 63-68.
• Menachemi, N., & Collum, T. H. (2011). Benefits and drawbacks of electronic health record systems. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 4, 47-55.
• Obermeyer, Z., & Emanuel, E. J. (2016). Predicting the future — big data, machine learning, and clinical medicine. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(13), 1216-1219.
• Rosenbloom, S. J., et al. (2011). Data warehousing and retrieval for clinical research. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 18(6), 779–786.
• Sharma, S., et al. (2019). Healthcare IT infrastructure: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Healthcare Engineering, 2019, 1-11.
• Siam, S., et al. (2014). Benefits and barriers of electronic health records in healthcare. Perspectives in Health Information Management, 11, 1-20.
• Wang, S., et al. (2018). Cost-benefit analysis of electronic health record implementation in hospitals. Journal of Medical Systems, 42(6), 105.