How can we bring IT to the doctor’s office?
The New York Times reports that few doctors have actually made the step to adopt electronic records (aka EMRs or EHRs, with M and H standing for “medical” or “health,” respectively). When almost every sector has adopted technology, what’s standing in the way of doctors doing the same? I think it boils down to a number of factors, some of which are noted in the NYT article. Do you agree? More importantly, what can we do to help doctors adopt IT?
Why I think doctors are not adopting EMRs:
- Many EMR vendors make it tough to determine who is offering what and which products are really going to work
- Installing an EMR system and transitioning/migrating from paper to electronic records is expensive and time-consuming, not only in terms of direct cost, but also in terms of time lost and patients not seen during the transition
- Few EMRs exist that really handle some of the more complex specialties, such as cardiology and oncology, really well
- Doctors are skittish about regulations such as HIPPA and don’t necessarily have a thorough understanding of the interplay between information technology and the relevant laws and regulations
- While insurers/payors benefit from the implementation of EMRs, they don’t pay any extra for it, so moving to an EMR is basically a non-reimbursable task, and that time could be spent seeing patients or investing in something that gives a more predictable return on investment
Users are provided with password access so the data is secured and confidentiality is upheld. Unauthorized users can’t get hold of the data as they might in paperwork documentation. History of who accessed and modified data is also on hand.
EMR is here to stay. I have been working with it for the past four years. Here are the advantages:
1. Gets rid of paper charts
2. Much more effiicient for scheduling, insurance issues and even allows the patient some access to their medical care. They can even request to make appointments and view lab results without having to call the Drs. office.
3. This is being pushed by the federal government in that it also cuts down on litigation and keeps from having to decipher the Drs. “chicken scratch” if something has to go to court for malpratice. As noted in the other post all entries are clearly legible, time stamped, and by whom.
Older physicians are somewhat resistent to EMR as it is somewhat of a big learning curve and a change from the way they have been used to practicing medicine all these years. Some are stuck in their ways. Unfortunately for them they will need to get on board or get left behind.
Health care organizations are working with the EMR vendors to go above and beyond to ensure the security of the system so that patient information is not compromised as this of course is a number one concern. Also there are constant upgrades that are continually tweeking the reliability EMR.
Yes, i agree that most of the EMR vendors don’t know what and which products are really going to work. Installing an EMR system and migrating from paper to electronic records is expensive and time-consuming.
The advancement in technology and the innovations it has given birth to have ventured into almost every field. A medical organization no more needs to handle the records or patient data manually as medical record systems are now used to take care of all tasks like data handling, bill management, patient records, their treatment details, health history, etc.