The Pros And Cons Of Electronic Medical Records
Abstract:
Despite the growth of computer technology in medicine, most medical encounters are still documented on paper medical records. The electronic medical record has numerous documented benefits, yet its use is still sparse. This paper describes the state of electronic medical records, their advantage over existing paper records, the problems impeding their implementation, and concerns over their security and confidentiality.
The provision of medical care is an information-intensive activity. Yet in an era when most commercial transactions are automated for reasons of efficiency and accuracy, it is somewhat ironic that most recording of medical events is still done on paper. Despite a wealth of evidence that the electronic medical record (EMR) can save time and cost as well as lead to improved clinical outcomes and data security, most patient-related information is still recorded manually. This paper describes efforts to …show more content…
computerize the medical record.
Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) are computerized medical information systems that collect, store and display patient information. They are a means to create legible and organized recordings and to access clinical information about individual patients. Further, EMRs are intended to replace existing (often paper based) medical records which are already familiar to practitioners. Patient records have been stored in paper form for centuries and, over this period of time, they have consumed increasing space and notably delayed access to efficient medical care. In contrast, EMRs store individual patient clinical information electronically and enable instant availability of this information to all providers in the healthcare chain and so should assist in providing coherent and consistent care.
Introduction
Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) and Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are viewed as interchangeable synonyms in most health informatics.
Other similar expressions exist albeit with a sometimes slightly restricted focus. While EMRs have a general focus on medical care, Electronic Patient Records (EPRs) and Computerized Patient Records (CPRs) “contain clinical information about a patients from a particular hospital” and Electronic Health Care Records (EHCRs) “contain a patient’s health information”. The perceived advantages of EMRs can be summarized as “optimizing the documentation of patient encounters, improving communication of information to physicians, improving access to patient medical information, reduction of errors, optimizing billing and improving reimbursement for services, forming a data repository for research and quality improvement, and reduction of paper”. As EMRs are viewed as having a great potential for improving quality, continuity, safety and efficiency in healthcare, as they are being implemented across the
world.
Despite the high expectations and interest in EMRs worldwide, their overall adoption rate is relatively low and they face several problems. For instance, they are seen as contrary to a physician’s traditional working style, they require a greater capability in dealing with computers and installing a system that absorbs considerable financial resources. The slow rate of adoption suggests that resistance among physicians must be strong because physicians are the main frontline user-group of EMRs. Whether or not they support and use EMRs will have a great influence on other user-groups in a medical practice, such as nurses and administrative staff (Fig. 1). As a result, physicians have a great impact on the overall adoption level of EMRs.
As it requires physicians to actively support and use EMRs to benefit from them, it is essential to understand the possible obstacles to their implementation from the physicians’ perspectives. The objective of this paper is to identify, categorize, and analyze obstacles perceived by physicians to the adoption of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs). Further, possible obstacle-related interventions will be suggested to support implementers of EMRs in overcoming this reluctance.
Despite the growth of computer technology in medicine, most medical encounters are still documented on paper medical records. The electronic medical record has numerous documented benefits, yet its use is still sparse. This paper describes the state of electronic medical records, their advantage over existing paper records, the problems impeding their implementation, and concerns over their security and confidentiality.
The provision of medical care is an information-intensive activity. Yet in an era when most commercial transactions are automated for reasons of efficiency and accuracy, it is somewhat ironic that most recording of medical events is still done on paper. Despite a wealth of evidence that the electronic medical record (EMR) can save time and cost as well as lead to improved clinical outcomes and data security, most patient-related information is still recorded manually. This paper describes efforts to …show more content…
computerize the medical record.
Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) are computerized medical information systems that collect, store and display patient information. They are a means to create legible and organized recordings and to access clinical information about individual patients. Further, EMRs are intended to replace existing (often paper based) medical records which are already familiar to practitioners. Patient records have been stored in paper form for centuries and, over this period of time, they have consumed increasing space and notably delayed access to efficient medical care. In contrast, EMRs store individual patient clinical information electronically and enable instant availability of this information to all providers in the healthcare chain and so should assist in providing coherent and consistent care.
Introduction
Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) and Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are viewed as interchangeable synonyms in most health informatics.
Other similar expressions exist albeit with a sometimes slightly restricted focus. While EMRs have a general focus on medical care, Electronic Patient Records (EPRs) and Computerized Patient Records (CPRs) “contain clinical information about a patients from a particular hospital” and Electronic Health Care Records (EHCRs) “contain a patient’s health information”. The perceived advantages of EMRs can be summarized as “optimizing the documentation of patient encounters, improving communication of information to physicians, improving access to patient medical information, reduction of errors, optimizing billing and improving reimbursement for services, forming a data repository for research and quality improvement, and reduction of paper”. As EMRs are viewed as having a great potential for improving quality, continuity, safety and efficiency in healthcare, as they are being implemented across the
world.
Despite the high expectations and interest in EMRs worldwide, their overall adoption rate is relatively low and they face several problems. For instance, they are seen as contrary to a physician’s traditional working style, they require a greater capability in dealing with computers and installing a system that absorbs considerable financial resources. The slow rate of adoption suggests that resistance among physicians must be strong because physicians are the main frontline user-group of EMRs. Whether or not they support and use EMRs will have a great influence on other user-groups in a medical practice, such as nurses and administrative staff (Fig. 1). As a result, physicians have a great impact on the overall adoption level of EMRs.
As it requires physicians to actively support and use EMRs to benefit from them, it is essential to understand the possible obstacles to their implementation from the physicians’ perspectives. The objective of this paper is to identify, categorize, and analyze obstacles perceived by physicians to the adoption of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs). Further, possible obstacle-related interventions will be suggested to support implementers of EMRs in overcoming this reluctance.