The Internet Age Influence on Electronic Medical Records The Internet has affected many industries around the globe, and its effects are ever growing. Medicine is no exception from this paradigm; various aspects of medical practice have been affected by the World Wide Web. One of the most heated controversies in the medical field now is Electronic Medical Records; this issue has triggered an array of contradicting responses from various experts. Within the scope of this research, we will elaborate on the Electronic Medical records issue. The first attempts to establish the electronic health patient record (EPHR or EMR) were initiated in the 1960s and continued into the 1970s and 1980s. In 1991, the Institute of Medicine published a paper titled “The Future Computer-Based Patient Record,” which declared the EPHR as an essential technological tool and also predicted the widespread use of computer-based patient records by 2002.
EPHR can be defined as a “unified, secure solution for a platform and institution independent longitudinal electronic health record.” (Clayton, p. 355) In other words, a record that would document all of the health care interventions in a person’s life starting with neonatal events and ending with his or her post-mortem. There are five distinct stages toward the development of the true EPHR. The first stage is the Automated Medical Record, which only about 5% of institutions and physicians’ practices have in place. (Graham, G., Nugent, L., Strouse, K, p. 20) This initial stage uses computers, but continues to rely on paper records as well for documentation.
The Research paper on Are Electronic Medical Records A Cure For Health Care?
Answer 1: The major issue discussed in the case study is regarding transfer of medical records to electronic database. Health care costs reached $207 billion in Canada and health care sector in US consumed 18% of GDP in year 2012. The solution to this financial and economic problem has been figured out which demands entering the information in EMR (Electronic Medical Record) systems. EMR systems ...
This is the first step toward the ultimate goal and is a necessary developmental stage. The second stage is called the Computerized Medical Record (CMR) stage, which totally eliminates the need for paper. At this level, the data is scanned into the system which preserves data integrity features. Some U.S. hospitals have entered this level with mixed success. The third stage is the Electronic Medical Record (EMR), which would be a true enterprisewide application and would allow accessing of all patient information available within the enterprise.
The EMR would allow the computer to record the complaints of the patient and would help in the diagnostic process as well as developing a plan of care and the placement of orders. This stage is provider-oriented. The fourth stage is called the electronic patient Record and would be all that the third stage is, but also offer multi-provider links (community based, regional, national and international).
This stage of development requires a unique national and international patient, provider and payer identification system as well as the infrastructure and technology for this interchange of information. The fifth and ultimate stage is referred to as the Electronic Patient health record (EPHR) and is the goal of all of the other stages. The EPHR makes the patient the center of the process by involving him or her in all aspects of data entry, as well as through the inclusion of data which is not necessarily health-related (such as the person’s banking information, etc.).
The Term Paper on Analysis On Electronic Data Imaging
INTRODUCTION DigiFile has been serving the Houston community since 1992. Originally a litigation support company, they evolved into a total solution service organization for electronic document management. They offer conversion services, both at their production facility and on-site, as well as open architecture data management solutions. While initially servicing the legal industry they have ...
The creation of the electronic patient record or the electronic health record was a journey without a definite end and was not a question of finding the right vendor as much as it was catching sight of the vision. (Kalra, p. 141) The overall message is that the physician — or even the somewhat less-expensive but still costly nurse — should not be the ones to enter a lot of the information. It was stated in numerous lectures that patients should enter much of their own data. The patient was deemed capable of being the best source of his or her history and chief medical complaint, at the very least. It is clear that the industry will receive encouragement as needed to continue to develop the electronic patient record.
Both EMR users and nonusers believe current EMRs are too costly. The data suggests that family physicians are willing to pay a relatively low set-up charge .
