You are here: Unit 4 Software Setup > Setting up new users and user groups

Setting up new users and user groups

The User Manager in Chargemaster Toolkit provides tremendous flexibility to control what a user sees, how they impact the data file and what tools they may use. This flexibility increases the complexity of understanding and monitoring the user settings but by classifying users into groups you can simplify control of the user settings. Thoughtful planning and execution of the security options can positively impact everyone’s satisfaction with the Toolkit and assure a well-controlled process.

The business model you use to manage, organize and track the flow of CDM maintenance requests from users and work in progress among the CDM maintenance team will directly affect how you set up your user security. In addition to deciding who will have authority to initiate adds, deletes and modifications through the Toolkit you have the option to separately review and approve all transactions from a centralized point of control.

When you turn the user’s auto accept function off the system will automatically flag all modified transactions by that user, attach a pending status and display the date the event was initiated in a special field. Acceptance of the transaction by a user logged on with the supervisor ID will reset its status and blank out the date. The audit trail of the transaction keeps a record of each step in its life cycle including the user’s ID.

Security options affecting user access to the hospital file:

Options Checklist:

I wish to limit which hospital files a user can view or edit.
I wish to limit which departments/GLs in a hospital file a user can view or edit.
I wish to ensure my users always check-in the hospital file when closing the Toolkit.
I wish to prevent users from unintentionally locking each other out of departments.

Examples of security options affecting users’ ability to impact data file:

I wish to allow several users authority to initiate transactions via the Toolkit. The CDM team will review, finalize and accept all changes before applying them to the billing system CDM.
I wish to limit which users can over-ride the Toolkit audit recommendation and require they document why.
I wish a user to have full edit authority in one department, and view only security for all other facility data.
I wish to control the request process for edits through an existing hospital tracking system. All appropriate edits will be entered into the Toolkit centrally so they can be monitored and documented. Once researched they will be reviewed and marked accepted before applying them to the billing system CDM.
I will only apply changes to the Toolkit after they are researched and approved through my independent tracking system. Only a central group of users will have authority to initiate changes in the Toolkit. Their changes should automatically be accepted by the system.
All changes identified through the Toolkit recommendations will be made directly to the billing system CDM table with no attempt to track or document them within the Toolkit. We will merge an updated CDM file periodically into the Toolkit for a retrospective audit.

Security options affecting user access to analytical, communication and research tools:

Users will have full access to the analytical, export, reporting and communication tools.
I want to limit user access to the research and communication tools only.

Security options to standardize user settings:

I wish to create two or more categories of users who share the same security settings.

Key information and lessons from the field:

Successful organizations allow a few weeks for the CDM maintenance team to audit the CDM file and learn to navigate its features before rolling out the functionality to a broader audience. Consider setting a tentative schedule for the user rollout that holds everyone accountable for moving through the learning and acclimation stages as quickly as possible.
It may be useful to export the Toolkit permissions log for later use as reference material for validating individual users against the standard settings.
User security can evolve as the hospital’s work processes adapt to the functionality of the Toolkit. Most users can quickly benefit from the research and filtering features of the product with limited training. Consider providing new users with view only security as this is a good way to allow them to gain familiarity by experimentation.
Permission settings belonging to a group take precedence over any settings allocated to a user assigned to that group. Therefore, groups should only be used when all users in the group are to have exactly the same security settings. It is still possible to separately designate the individual departments to which each user has access.
Use the Auto check-in user permission to ensure that users will always release their checked out departments when they close the Toolkit. This will maximize the time when departments are available for editing by others.
When setting up users with similar security settings the Copy User option can alternatively be used as a starting point. Then the supervisor may modify individual security settings as appropriate for each user.
Each hospital file may contain one supervisor ID. Certain functions, such as merging or change tracking are available only to the supervisor. Some providers assign a unique user ID to each user for their normal processes but also provide certain team members with the supervisor details for access to the supervisor-only functions. This option is not recommended as accountability for audits in the audit trail will no longer be accurate.
It is possible to track changes made by certain users and have them authorized by the supervisor. This can be useful where a user is new to the system or on a trial period. Such users may be set up with the auto accept option disabled to ensure their changes are flagged for authorization.
The Chargemaster Toolkit approval process (change tracking) currently facilitates one level of acceptance. Providers with systems that communicate and track multiple sequential approvals may prefer to continue to maintain a separate request system. Providers without such a system might consider the Craneware Online messaging system to post multiple requests for approval concurrently and automate documentation of responses within the transaction audit trail. Routine checking of pending transactions for documentation of approvals would be required in this business model. Once all approvals are evident the CDM staff could complete the transaction by accepting it in the supervisor mode.
Entry of all valid change requests including changes initiated by the CDM maintenance team into the Toolkit may be perceived as redundant with existing change request tracking systems. However the automated history tracking and date tracking of all pending transactions is an excellent way to assure a centralized measurement point of the outstanding workload, prioritization based on age and ongoing review of transaction cycle times. It also produces a simple, consolidated view of all outstanding CDM maintenance activity at any point in time for management.