The Evolution Of Meaningful Use Certified EHR
The history of the electronic health record dates as far back as the late 1960s. The advancement of technology allowed data to be moved from punch cards to keyboards. The parallel efforts around the country are all for the efficiency and improvement of the delivery of healthcare.
All those designs might have very unique ways in defining their purpose for launching these systems. In present day circumstances, electronic health records have come a long way to have the Meaningful Use certified EHR description. Yet the goal can be summarized in three aspects, which are eliminating the problems of healthcare logistics, to lessen paperwork, and to create an accessible, informational treasure trove.
EHRs went mainstream and commercial when technology did as well. The systems bred by academic medical centers developed together with the IT industry. When personal computers arrived in the 1990s and Internet became available, EHRs were challenged with the increasing heterogeneity of its users.
You might be thinking that the increasing heterogeneity is still an issue we are facing today with EHR. You heard the news about EHR being blamed for the death of the latest Ebola victim. Despite having told the nurse that he had just arrived home from the country where Ebola was present, the doctor dismissed his symptoms and sent the patient home. You be the judge, but first let us examine the design of EHRs when they were made in order to address the exclusive needs of ambulatory givers.
Physician specific workflows, integrated billing, interoperability, and manageable footprints are the areas in which EHRs were very much focused. Dictated notes from doctors are stored and hospitals have traditionally integrated data from laboratories, radiology and other sources. The data documentation is usually done by finance personnel who are encoding billing codes or from by clerks and secretaries. Doctors were therefore away from direct interaction with those who are dealing with EHR, only using the records to view information.
Our society, the government, and healthcare professionals should learn something from the Ebola case. While technology may provide us with ease, it is not an excuse to be lenient about its usage. Some studies theorize that because of the illusion of efficiency EHRs seem to offer, they have rather bred the attitude of seeing cases as simply routine, regular ones, mistaking a serious, fatal illness for something common.
Those theories may still be speculated upon, but there are EHR safety guidelines that we should be aware about. Health records are there to make data easier to access, yet in the case of Mr. Duncan, there was obviously a failure between nurse and doctor in conveying that the patient was indeed exhibiting symptoms of Ebola. Concerns about online and offline information were raised, but the bigger factor lies on the lack of training and awareness.
Ensure that the software and hardware areas are all in good condition. A simple malfunction may not just affect one department, but it could have a domino effect to all communities. Physicians should utilize the CPOE and all kinds of health records should be handled accordingly.
It has been suggested that all orders should be entered via CPOE to maximize safety. Stage One of the Meaningful Use declares that at least thirty percent of these orders should be entered through CPOE, while Stage Two should have at least sixty percent. Institutions that have not yet implemented this coding should already make their move.
All those designs might have very unique ways in defining their purpose for launching these systems. In present day circumstances, electronic health records have come a long way to have the Meaningful Use certified EHR description. Yet the goal can be summarized in three aspects, which are eliminating the problems of healthcare logistics, to lessen paperwork, and to create an accessible, informational treasure trove.
EHRs went mainstream and commercial when technology did as well. The systems bred by academic medical centers developed together with the IT industry. When personal computers arrived in the 1990s and Internet became available, EHRs were challenged with the increasing heterogeneity of its users.
You might be thinking that the increasing heterogeneity is still an issue we are facing today with EHR. You heard the news about EHR being blamed for the death of the latest Ebola victim. Despite having told the nurse that he had just arrived home from the country where Ebola was present, the doctor dismissed his symptoms and sent the patient home. You be the judge, but first let us examine the design of EHRs when they were made in order to address the exclusive needs of ambulatory givers.
Physician specific workflows, integrated billing, interoperability, and manageable footprints are the areas in which EHRs were very much focused. Dictated notes from doctors are stored and hospitals have traditionally integrated data from laboratories, radiology and other sources. The data documentation is usually done by finance personnel who are encoding billing codes or from by clerks and secretaries. Doctors were therefore away from direct interaction with those who are dealing with EHR, only using the records to view information.
Our society, the government, and healthcare professionals should learn something from the Ebola case. While technology may provide us with ease, it is not an excuse to be lenient about its usage. Some studies theorize that because of the illusion of efficiency EHRs seem to offer, they have rather bred the attitude of seeing cases as simply routine, regular ones, mistaking a serious, fatal illness for something common.
Those theories may still be speculated upon, but there are EHR safety guidelines that we should be aware about. Health records are there to make data easier to access, yet in the case of Mr. Duncan, there was obviously a failure between nurse and doctor in conveying that the patient was indeed exhibiting symptoms of Ebola. Concerns about online and offline information were raised, but the bigger factor lies on the lack of training and awareness.
Ensure that the software and hardware areas are all in good condition. A simple malfunction may not just affect one department, but it could have a domino effect to all communities. Physicians should utilize the CPOE and all kinds of health records should be handled accordingly.
It has been suggested that all orders should be entered via CPOE to maximize safety. Stage One of the Meaningful Use declares that at least thirty percent of these orders should be entered through CPOE, while Stage Two should have at least sixty percent. Institutions that have not yet implemented this coding should already make their move.
posted by Vittoria @ November 02, 2014
0 Comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home