| US Market & Recent Surveys |
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Implementing an electronic medical record (EMR) is a major initiative that should be undertaken only after a thoughtful analysis of the costs and benefits involved. |
| read more |
|
|
|
| ADA for exchanging data processing standards to the dental services of the health care industry... |
| read more |
|
|
| Barack Obama: In his Plan for a Healthy America, Obama calls for lowering costs through investment in electronic health information technology systems, acknowledging... |
| read more |
|
| |
|
 |
| |
|
EMR
IN 2009
It’s not just about the selection of the
Electronic Medical Records (EMR) Software solutions;
but rather, it’s about the conversion from
paper to the EMR solution and the execution of
a well planned EMR deployment. Yes, this is more
than just scanning the paper (which is a challenging
task in itself). It has more to do with the mapping
of the patient data into the EMR. In simple terms:
Scanning a document and then electronically taking
this scanned image and placing it into the appropriate
fields and correct category within the new “e-file”.
This will ensure that the new e-file is loaded
with the correct placement of each scan, i.e.
current medication, labs, imaging reports/images,
referring physician and hospital reports, etc.
The old adage “failing to plan is planning
to fail” could not be more applicable when
implementing an EMR.
This well known expression begs the question:
Why have so many physician practices had bad experiences
converting from paper charts to an EMR and why
have many deployments failed so miserably?
Answer: Level
of expectation and ongoing communication between
the practice, the EMR vendor and the IT Company.
On June 16, 1858, in Springfield, Illinois, while
delivering his address to his Republican Colleagues
in the House of Representatives Abraham Lincoln
said, “A house divided against it self cannot
stand”. This is true of a medical practice
as well. If the communication begins to falter,
so will the implementation. Ongoing, preplanned
meetings should be scheduled and kept. This will
allow the appropriate people to hear and understand
what is happening at the practice level all of
the way through the implementation. Reliance on
the EMR vendor to implement and adhere to an implementation
plan for all aspects of an EMR implementation
is a false expectation for a practice to have.
You may consider assigning this task to a staff
member or hiring a part-time project manager for
a 3 or 6-month contract assigned exclusively to
the EMR implementation project.
The cost of hiring a project manager like these
pales in comparison to the cost of a failed EMR
implementation. If an EMR is being considered,
research is obviously very important. However,
if too many hours are spent in the viewing of
EMR demonstrations, too much emphasis may be placed
on the EMR product as features and benefits are
compared. Researching and comparing the post sale
support, ongoing updates and customer support
should be researched to an even higher degree.
Converting from paper to EMR is not simple. There
are so many variables to consider. Everything
from over-promised and under-delivered products,
un-kept customization and product enhancement
promises. The practice may have unrealistic expectations
and may not realize the time commitment that needs
to be invested to ensure this total EMR conversion
is well orchestrated.
The physician practice must also think about their
workflow and how much they are willing to change
their working status quo. To date, there simply
is no one solution that can satisfy the needs
at all levels. Sacrifices will have to be made. |
| |
| PRACTICE
SIZE |
ANY
EMR |
COMREHENSIVE
EMR |
| SOLO |
24% |
7.1% |
| SINGLE
PARTNER |
28% |
9.7% |
| 3-5
PHYSICIAN |
30% |
13.4% |
| Advanced
Data Systems |
30.9% |
16.6% |
| 11
OR MORE PHYSICIANS |
46.5% |
26.6% |
|
| |
 |
EMR
in 2014
FROM
2014 ONWARDS EMR IS MANDATORY:
Lawmakers want to make getting a medical license
hinge on a clinician’s ability to use an
EHR by 2015. Physicians there have mixed feelings
about the plan.
The licensure requirement is part of a jumbo healthcare
reform bill introduced in the Massachusetts state
senate . The legislation also mandates that all
hospitals and community health centers implement
interoperable EHRs by 2015.
Where physicians stand in this EHR mandate is
cloudy. Although some news accounts have described
the legislation as requiring EHRs for all healthcare
providers, the wording of the bill on this point
omits any reference to physicians. A spokesperson
for state Sen. Therese Murray, the bill’s
sponsor, acknowledges that the mandate technically
applies to just hospitals and community health
centers, but says that getting physicians to adopt
the technology by 2015 is still the goal.
The requirement to make physician licensure contingent
on clicking a mouse in an exam room is more defined.
According to the legislation, the state medical
board “shall require, as a standard of eligibility
for licensure, that applicants show a pre-determined
level of competency in the use of computerized
physician order entry, e-prescribing, electronic
health records and other forms of health information
technology.”
In 2004, President Bush set a goal of most Americans
using an electronic medical record by 2014. In
his vision, doctors by then would be using EMR
systems with interoperable standards that would
allow them to share lab results, images, computerized
orders and prescription information with hospitals
and other health facilities.
The nation's medical community is not substantially
closer to an interconnected, interoperable EMR
system now than it was in 2004, concluded a January
California HealthCare Foundation report based
on interviews conducted last summer with 22 health
information technology experts from across the
country.
The challenge is one every hospital and doctor's
office in the country faces. President's Health
Information Technology Plan mandates that patients
have electronic medical records by 2014. |
|
| |
|
| |
|