Electronic Medical Records
Electronic medical records, also known as electronic medical records Pros and cons are the subject of countless debates and news articles over the past few years. years, as more and more countries catch up with the US and other countries, making the change from paper to electronic records is becoming an inevitability.
So what’s the issue behind the change from ordinary paper-based record keeping, to electronic record keeping using sector-based terminology? The overall cost of record keeping is low and the overhead costs are low, as well. The major cost long-term is paper-based record keeping, which by today’s standards is very expensive.
As such, many countries other than the US are jumping onto the electronic bandwagon, to keep up with the low cost, and high quality records. Unfortunately, there are still some nations that have not caught up with the change to electronic records yet and are still stuck in a world of complicated terminology, and paperwork.
In years past, there has been a strong correlation between the training of doctors and the theory of how doctors and their patients utilize paper and pen to record medical history. Over time, the training of doctors has veered off into the realm of how they actually work in practice, rather than how they theoretically should.
In years past, a competent practitioner could easily figure out what questions to ask and when. But today the glasses-in, the eyes-out mentality is taking hold. It’s become too easy for patients to simply rely on paper and pen. And the results are crystal clear.
As was mentioned briefly in the above article, the EMR Pros and Cons are that today’s electronic medical record systems are far less prone to errors than paper records. And while paper records can be prone to error and abuse, the addition of EMR software to practice has been shown to drastically reduce errors in at least 25% of clerical duties.
While doctors can still record information on paper, paper-based records will be much more likely to contain accurate data. This reduces the possibility of medical malpractice and keeps the data in the state records database safe and secure.
But there is one area of electronic medical record software that still strains credibility, and that’s the background information that EMR software systems need to search the records. It is this background information that is often of concern to employers because if a fraudster purports to have records on paper that are actually in a computer, it can lead to trouble for the employer.
To an extent, the paper-based record helps minimize the possibility of the accidental reveal of sensitive patient information. But when software systems must, by necessity, pull information from potentially hundreds of millions of records, it becomes far more likely that sensitive information will be inadvertently disclosed.
This may rattle some nerves, and cause some hairs to raise, but, given the new technology, it can be done more safely and effectively. In today’s world of abundant opportunity and low cost, it’s becoming less and less necessary for paper-based records to be physically stored in a central location. And when electronic data is pulled from a central location, it doesn’t need to be kept in the lock for the world.
This means that records can be unmotivated and instances of fraudulence can be more easily prevented. It also means that paper-based records can be umativated and incumbers to prevent fraud.
In summary, EMRs can help doctors and patients better manage chronic conditions and focus on preventive care. However, EMRs lead to data breaches and pose potential harm to patients with serious health conditions. Therefore, EMRs must be carefully regulated and protected.
Switching to electronic medical records is a great idea, especially since it is a great way to make a better healthcare system. It will enable the better management of medical records, and create a convenient way to have access to all the information that the patient needs.