Electronic Medical Records – Are There Reasons for Low Implementation?

The use of electronic medical records (EMRs) has gone from a vision to an idea to a reality. It has been used in different institutions around the world, including hospitals, clinics, and community health centers. At the same time, a lack of EMR integration and understanding among physicians has been increasing due to organizational barriers and knowledge gaps.

A recent survey found that just 1% of physicians were very satisfied with their current EMRs while 96% were not satisfied at all with these systems. Only 25% stated they would recommend their current practice or hospital's EMR system to their colleagues.

There are many reasons why physicians and other healthcare workers are not using EMRs to their full potential. One of the major barriers is that many EMRs do not have an interactive patient portal for physicians and patients. The lack of this feature is a common obstacle for physicians and has been pointed out by a number of healthcare experts as one of the main causes of inefficiency and frustration among medical professionals.

One reason for this problem is that many EMRs were designed based on the assumption that their users will be medical professionals (such as physicians) rather than non-medical users (such as pharmacists, nurses, and technicians). Therefore, these systems tend to focus on certain types of data exchange (i.e. electronic medical records vs. electronic health records). The main purpose for building such systems is so that physicians can avoid having to record data on paper and store it in their desk drawers. However, not all patients are willing to share their information with their physician on a regular basis, which makes some of these arrangements less than ideal.

There are also many practical issues that hinder physician access to the information they do need while they are in the hospital or clinic, such as restricted access time or limited computer terminals. For example, since pharmacists have already accepted responsibility for many of the pharmacy transactions performed at a hospital or clinic, they have access to the needed data at any time (even during meal periods) if they wish to retrieve it. This can be done from their own desktops or from mobile devices such as smartphones.

Another practical issue is that medical professionals may have to deal with other systems (e.g. electronic medication administration records, electronic health records, electronic medical records) and these are often incompatible with one another. Medical professionals are unsure how to address this problem and this is an additional reason for physicians to avoid using EMRs in their practices or hospitals.

One of the drawbacks of paper-based medical records is that they cannot be easily integrated with other systems and patients may not always feel comfortable sharing their information while dealing with an unfamiliar doctor or nurse (even if they feel comfortable enough to do so while dealing with a pharmacist).

In order to deal with these issues, hospitals and clinics have implemented various types of data exchange in order to avoid the problems caused by incompatibility of medical records. Unfortunately, there is no universal solution for the medical industry and an effective solution will require the collaboration of all parties involved in healthcare (i.e. physicians, pharmacists, nurses, technicians). However, for this collaboration to be successful, pharmacists should be able to freely share information between doctors and patients without having to rely on other systems that may not be capable of dealing with more than one form of data exchange at a time. 

This problem is not specific to EMRs and it has been recognized by other industries as well. For example, the problem of incompatibility between different forms of data exchange was also recognized by the banking industry when they were faced with a similar problem. A solution was built within a collaboration between banks and credit bureaux, which has resulted in one single system that facilitates communication among different parties (e.g. banking institutions, credit bureaus, delivery companies). This solution is similar to one that should be implemented in healthcare and it has been recognized as an important factor in increasing the efficiency of this industry.

One solution to this problem would be to allow physicians, pharmacists, and technicians access to their own data (via a patient portal) so that they can exchange data with each other without having to rely on other systems. This will increase the efficiency of operations at hospitals and clinics as well as between different systems because it will allow doctors, pharmacists, nurses and technicians free access to the necessary information when needed. The implementation of a patient portal would also eliminate one major obstacle faced by patients who seek treatment from several different healthcare professionals within a short period of time (e.g. a patient who visits the hospital for two appointments within a week). Currently, if such patients wish to visit a different hospital or clinic for their third appointment within a week, then they need to deal with two separate systems (i.e. two separate portals). This can be problematic if a patient is not familiar with using such systems and it poses additional problems when dealing with sensitive medical information. These obstacles will be removed by implementing an effective patient portal and this will increase the overall efficiency and productivity of the healthcare industry.

The success of any EMR project is measured primarily by physician adoption, which has shown improvement with the use of patient portals in EMRs. For example, most hospitals and clinics in the United States have begun implementing patient portals in order to increase the productivity of their operations. As a result of these efforts, there has been an improvement in data exchange among different parties and this has led to greater efficiency and productivity. This is because patient portals allow physicians to access the necessary information when needed without having to rely on other systems that may not be capable of dealing with more than one form of data exchange at a time.

The success of any EMR project will be determined by physician adoption (as measured by physician satisfaction) as well as organizational implementation (e.g. data sharing). These results show that there is a relationship between these two factors and they are generally correlated with each other. This relationship has been identified by a number of studies and several reasons for this correlation have been identified as well. For example, a study conducted by the American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) found that most physicians viewed EMRs positively but at the same time they had low levels of satisfaction with their systems. This study also showed that physician adoption was directly linked to these two factors and they were highly correlated with one another.

Patient portals can play a role in improving both physician adoption and organizational implementation in EMRs and this will increase the overall efficiency of operations within hospitals and clinics. This has already been demonstrated by many companies that promote their own EMR systems through patient portals on their web sites (e.g.

Conclusion:

This study has shown that there is a relationship between physician adoption and organizational implementation in EMRs. This relationship is also highly correlated with each other and it is determined by factors that are specific to each organization (i.e. the culture of a healthcare institution, the goal of its EMR project, etc.). In order to improve such a relationship (and subsequently increase the overall efficiency of operations), existing EMR systems must be improved to include patient portals that will allow free access to the necessary information when needed by physicians, pharmacists, nurses and technicians.