EMR: Friend or Foe?
For all of the arguments made in the last decade–and more recently by the Obama administration–to jump on the electronic medical record (EMR) bandwagon, there are still many arguments against holding the technology as an industry savior. This Time.com piece, written by Scott Haig, illustrates many of the pitfalls that are often overlooked when talking about how EMRs can improve healthcare. And though the argument for incorporating EMRs into hospitals and clinics is often the cost savings associated with them, Haig points out that those savings are mostly for the practices using EMRs, not the patient.
Though using EMRs brings up larger issues, such as privacy questions and the complexities of building an electronic system for the entire nation when individual health systems can’t get their own technologies to always “talk” to each other, EMRs make it difficult for physicians to prescribe special directions for a patient. They also often push doctors into billing for diagnoses that a patient may not have, which ultimately costs the patient more money. However, a more expensive diagnosis will reward the health system with a higher reimbursement payment. Additionally, physicians are constantly reminded when they might be ordering a test or a treatment for a patient who is not considered “sick” enough to receive that treatment, based on algorithms within the EMR. Does the physician wait for that patient to become sicker, simply to give that patient the treatment he or she thinks is necessary–or does he or she eat the costs of this treatment that might not be reimbursed? Haig points out that with a paper system, hospitals had to deal with this question after the treatment had been prescribed.
With the buzz around EMRs that is surely to get bigger over the next few years, there are sure to be many voices speaking on behalf of their benefits and drawbacks of implementing a fully electronic system. What are your opinions on this technology? Has your employer already confronted many of the issues Haig points to in his article?
About the Author: Heather Comak is a Managing Editor at HCPro, Inc., where she is the editor of the monthly publication Briefings on Patient Safety, as well as patient safety-related books and audio conferences. She is also is the Assistant Director of the Association for Healthcare Accreditation Professionals.
Contact Heather by e-mailing hcomak@hcpro.com
Carl Anderson | Mar 30, 2009 | Reply
EMRs are bring up a number of important issues including medical privacy and their use in clinical research. I discuss these issues on my blog at: http://carl1anderson.wordpress.com/ and I invite your comments.
Jay Andrews | May 21, 2009 | Reply
EMR surely a friend for both the physcians and the patients because it saves the time for both of them, thus the physcians can spend time to care better.There is always a high security in electronic systems and confidentially upheld!
Andy Stones | May 27, 2009 | Reply
Very interesting article. EMRs are indeed the next step in medical health care, but there are some backdrop as well. The main reason people avoid EMR is the privacy issue, but health is more important then medical records privacy.
EMR Implementation | Oct 29, 2009 | Reply
Good informative article… thanks for the post.