<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does CCHIT Really Matter?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ehrscope.com/does-cchit-really-matter/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ehrscope.com/does-cchit-really-matter</link>
	<description>EHR, EMR and PHR Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:40:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Politico</title>
		<link>http://www.ehrscope.com/does-cchit-really-matter/comment-page-1#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Politico</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:11:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ehrscope.com/blog/?p=56#comment-56</guid>
		<description>I certainly agree that a program does not need to be CCHIT certified to be a great program, nor to be a successful product.

However, CCHIT may make sense if you&#039;re hoping to have your hospital pay for your EMR (or at least for 85% of it).

The Stark exemption can be interpreted as allowing hospitals to provide for up to 85% of the cost of the EMR software for certified EMRs, AKA CCHIT certified EMRs.

It wouldn&#039;t be a proper conclusion to state that no CCHIT certified EMRs are viable.  However, of those EMRs that are certified at least it can be said that they had a lot of extra cash available to allow them to devote the programming resources required to become certified.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I certainly agree that a program does not need to be CCHIT certified to be a great program, nor to be a successful product.</p>
<p>However, CCHIT may make sense if you&#8217;re hoping to have your hospital pay for your EMR (or at least for 85% of it).</p>
<p>The Stark exemption can be interpreted as allowing hospitals to provide for up to 85% of the cost of the EMR software for certified EMRs, AKA CCHIT certified EMRs.</p>
<p>It wouldn&#8217;t be a proper conclusion to state that no CCHIT certified EMRs are viable.  However, of those EMRs that are certified at least it can be said that they had a lot of extra cash available to allow them to devote the programming resources required to become certified.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ICMCC Newspage &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Does CCHIT Really Matter?</title>
		<link>http://www.ehrscope.com/does-cchit-really-matter/comment-page-1#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator>ICMCC Newspage &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Does CCHIT Really Matter?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 08:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ehrscope.com/blog/?p=56#comment-55</guid>
		<description>[...] physicians to think that any CCHIT-certified EMR will provide quality and functionality.&#8221; Article Ryan Ricks, EMR Blog, 6 January [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] physicians to think that any CCHIT-certified EMR will provide quality and functionality.&#8221; Article Ryan Ricks, EMR Blog, 6 January [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

