QualityNet Jira and QualityNet Confluence will be briefly unavailable on Wednesday, July 24, 2024, between 8:00 PM ET and 9:00 PM ET while the team performs an AMI update.  If you have questions or concerns, please reach out to us in Slack at #help-atlassian.

EQRS Communications Hub

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 9 Next »

Status

IN PROGRESS

StakeholdersEDI Submitters, Program, ISG
OutcomeDetermine what is an acceptable level to move forward of EQRS clinical closures from a data quality perspective and define the MVP that the EDI Submitter Outreach Taskforce will deliver in order to be considered "done".
Due date

 

Owner

Adrienne Ray

Background

Feedback from the EDIs were given in defining the "definition of done" from a data quality perspective.

Proposal

Definition of Done

Description

Taskforce MVP

Error rates are <5% or close to prior to EQRSEDIs each have their own error rates (pre-11/9/2020) and will share 4 months worth of data with CMS.
  • Average percentage across 4 months prior to 11/9/2020 per EDI.
  • Will continue to work with each EDI if the error rate is not <5% (post implementation of reinstatement of validation rules).
  • Within 5% range (up or down) of error trends data prior to EQRS Go-Live for each code within each phase of implementation. 
  • Michael Kennedy  - January 2020 back to October 2019 - broken down by each phase for each code.
Errors/Warnings are triggering as expected and data for warnings is being shown as submitted and visible in backend and UI

For errors that currently do not meet validation rules, the data does not show up in the UI.  If the code remains a warning as determined thru the Errors & Warnings Implementation, we will need to allow the data to be seen thru the UI.  Is this possible?  What is the level of effort around getting this accomplished?  

For each phase - for errors that are reverted to warnings, the developers need to take a deeper dive into the code to assess the LOE to have the warning visible via the UI.  Need to have this work built in to each phase to correct this issue.


Data completion and error/warning reporting is available at the same frequency as prior to EQRS

Provide Error Trends report similar to what CDDS provided in the past.  (PI14)?

System generated report available to the user (long term).

What reports should be included in this DOD?  Specify this in our DOD.

Major Bug List has been completed and successfully tested or any backlogged bugs are not impactful to QIP/Five Star results (this assumes a Major Bug List exists and becomes part of routine status updates)


  • EDI Issues Dashboard will be shared and tracked towards our DOD.
CMS has analyzed Admit/Discharges/Treatment and Clinical (from Aug. - Current month) EQRS data to assess data discrepancies that were introduced to EQRS.  EDIs have been given guidance and support to resolve the data discrepancies identified.  (Clean up effort).Will provide reports for EDIs to resubmit data via EDSM to correct discrepancies or update via UI.  Need to avoid backend scripting.
  • What type of reports will be provided?
  • What is the current state of data discrepancies in the system today.  ETL report to identify the volume of data discrepancies?  How will this be cleaned up - resubmitting files?
  • 2744 will provide visibility into this.  
  • Clean up effort will be planned for future work (not committed).  Many different avenues for data clean up

An agreed timeline for clinical closure schedule has been released.  Especially considering the independent clinics that are only on manual entry.

Will need to be addressed at a later time.  

  • No labels