Readers write to say that electronic medical records cost more than you think; that companies should be required to make matching 401(k) contributions; and more.

CFO Readers - CFO Magazine

CFO welcomes your letters. Send them to: The Editor, CFO, 253 Summer St., Boston, MA 02210

E-mail us at ScottLeibs@cfo.com, or contact a specific author by clicking on his or her byline. You can also post a comment directly on CFO.com by clicking on the appropriate link at the end of any article.

Please include your full name, title, company name, address, and telephone number. Letters are subject to editing for clarity and length.

Although “Strong Medicine” (May) does provide some insight into why insurers want electronic medical records (EMRs), it has a lot of misconceptions and misstatements. Among them:

1. “Just as technology streamlined industries like retailing and financial services, it should create efficiencies in health care that will slow premium growth from its traditional annual rate of about 7%.” There are no citations offered to show a decent study demonstrating such “efficiencies.”

2. “Malpractice insurers have already linked electronic systems with better-quality care; some will reduce premiums by as much as 5% for doctors who have gone digital.” Very few have actually decreased their premiums. In fact, EMRs can actually result in increased errors, decreased quality, false documentation, and the loss of privacy.

3. “…only about 9% of the country’s 5,000 hospitals and just under 20% of its 800,000 physicians use computerized recordkeeping….” The only data of importance is what falls into the category of “meaningful use.” The actual numbers are 2% of hospitals and 4% of physicians.

4. “Rand…estimates that when 90% of…providers use such systems, the savings will amount to $77 billion a year.” This has never been proven.

5. “…ROI calculations of such a move showed some modest financial benefit.” Studies have shown that for every group that makes an EMR work, another 50% have a failed installation. And of those that do make their systems functional, only about 10% actually use them “significantly.” Why didn’t the author interview angry doctors who have lost thousands in the quest for the EMR ROI?

6. “For small practices…the price of implementing an EMR system could reach nearly $40,000 per physician.” That’s only the initial cost, which ignores the average $1,500 per month ongoing fees and the cost of “significant use.” Overall, the average five-year cost is estimated to be about $300,000 per physician.

7. “CFOs…may soon develop an affection for EMRs, especially if the technology proves to be an antidote to soaring health-care premiums.” Again, these systems are expensive, rarely show an ROI, and have never been shown to decrease health-care costs.

Alberto Borges, M.D.
Arlington, Virginia

The Author Responds: In most cases, Dr. Borges is referring to projections, estimates, and tangential issues beyond the scope of the article. Previous studies haven’t tested EMRs under the same kind of conditions that will exist should substantial adoption come to pass; that is, with certification, standardization, training — and motivation.

The story did refer to doctors who have had EMRs for many years; they aren’t unhappy, but the systems they use are more like electronic order-entry than EMR. Their views may change, however, if they find out there is no cheap way for them to plug their systems in to the government-sanctioned network. They seem to expect that one of the existing companies (or an up-and-comer) will target them as a desirable market and come up with a solution.

Above article published on

http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/13687654/1/c_13720245

More than 50% of healthcare providers surveyed by IVANS do not believe the federal stimulus package will successfully encourage health IT adoption.

By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee InformationWeek

Although a majority of healthcare providers remain skeptical about how they’ll benefit by the federal government’s $20 billion stimulus program, many plan to forge ahead anyway, according to a report released this week.

About seven in 10 healthcare providers believe electronic medical records will have a positive impact on their businesses and patient care, but 80% say the lack of money is their biggest obstacle to deploying health IT systems, said the new report by IVANS, a supplier of EDI and network services to the insurance industry.

The nationwide, e-mailed survey of 508 healthcare providers — including hospitals, clinics, private medical practices, nursing homes, home healthcare organizations and medical billing companies — found that while nearly 40% plan to forge ahead with e-medical record deployments within the next 12 months, more than 50% of healthcare providers do not believe the federal stimulus package will successfully encourage health IT adoption.

Healthcare providers’ doubt appears to be rooted to several factor, most notably uncertainty about the specifics of the government’s eligibility requirements for receiving HIT-related rewards. Starting in 2011, the federal government is expected to begin awarding approximately $20 billion over the next five years, rewarding higher Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements to doctors and hospitals that demonstrate “meaningful use” of health IT.

However, the details of what will constitute “meaningful use” haven’t been worked out yet. The federal government is in the process of investigating and defining the scope of what “meaningful use” of health IT will qualify for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009’s HITECH (Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health) stimulus funding incentives. Just this week, a federal advisory panel — the HIT Policy Committee — unveiled some of its recommendations for the “meaningful use” definition.

“They’re on the right track,” said Clare DeNicola, IVANS CEO, of the HIT Policy Committee’s recommendation so far to the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services about the “meaningful use” definition. “It’s not about technology, it’s about the care — we can’t lose sight of that,” she said about the committee’s suggestions for how IT can be used for improving quality of patient care and public health.

Also fueling uncertainty among healthcare providers participating in the survey was this: Home healthcare providers and nursing homes were among the 508, healthcare providers polled. However, so far the HITECH federal stimulus legislations is vague on how those healthcare providers will participate in the new programs, despite the growing population of aging baby boomers who’ll likely increasingly require their services in coming years.

In fact, despite their skepticism and uncertainly about the government incentive programs, about four in 10 healthcare providers are planning to implement e-medical record systems over the next 12 months.

Many are already making investments in IT, including those that can help support e-medical record deployments, including wireless networks, business continuity technologies and connectivity to remote locations.

“Healthcare providers are wary but they are moving forward with technology innovations,” said DeNicola. “They’re not driven so much by the stimulus funds as they are in their belief that these technologies can help improve their businesses and patient care,” she said.

Finally, when survey participants were asked who should take the lead on driving adoption of healthcare IT to ensure its success, 47% of healthcare providers named themselves; 21% suggested the government should lead; 14% said healthcare insurers/payers should have that responsibility; and 18% were divided between industry associations and consumers leading the charge, according to the report.

Above article published on http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=RAI3YIPOK35Z2QSNDLOSKHSCJUNN2JVN?articleID=218000238&pgno=2&queryText=&isPrev=

Medical offices require a lot of efficiency to ensure that all patients are properly taken care of. Every such facility is a busy area where employing multiple people to do one job is a waste of time, money and resources. It will eat away at the revenues of small businesses and will increase running costs. This is particularly true when it comes to maintaining medical records. It is a data intensive job that needs a lot of accuracy and time to do by hand. Sometimes, errors are introduced into the data due to human negligence, which is inevitable.

This is why you should use EMR software that takes care of data handling and free up the time of your employees so that they can work more efficiently. By freeing your employees of records maintenance tasks, you can greatly boost the amount of work that gets done. It will also help you provide a better medical service to your clients and hence increases the amount of business that you are getting. Your clients will greatly appreciate getting improved medical care and your reputation will be better recognized.

Using EMR software makes a lot of business sense because you will be saving money in the long run. When you automate certain processes, you will be saving a lot of money due to lower operation and maintenance costs. Your record keeping will be much more streamlined and thus client information processing and recalling will only take a fraction of the time.

The efficient billing software also keeps track of all the due and overdue payments. It will automatically remind your patients about their dues with you. You can send invoices just like you did before, but with much more efficiency and ease.

A good EMR software will lead to efficient management on your part. Everyone has access to updated data and treatment plans. In addition, not having to manage and manipulate data manually usually means that your staff will be happier and more motivated - thus ensuring a lower staff turnover, which is important for any successful medical practice.

In the beginning, it takes a little time to get used to the system. However, professional grade software often comes with adequate support. Within a short period of time, you and your staff would have gotten used to operating the new software. With EMR software, your record keeping becomes so much more efficient and organized that you will start wondering why you did not start using it sooner.

You may also market your facility as environmentally friendly by using these software. You can legitimately do that because you will be using less paper or no paper at all. This will help you reduce your carbon footprint greatly and introduce a much more efficient record keeping system without damaging the environment. People have become more environmentally conscious in recent times and this will ensure a greater amount of client recognition and respect.

Thus, by choosing to streamline and organize your entire record keeping and billing process, you will not only be helping your business but also your customers and the environment

Above article published on

http://www.articlesbase.com/branding-articles/emr-electronic-medical-records-software-for-greater-medical-office-efficiency-949149.html

True or false? The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will provide physician practices incentives for the purchase of an electronic medical record system.

False. The ARRA is, indeed, meant to foster health IT adoption. But the incentive money will directly address the use of EMRs, not the purchase of the systems.

Secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, has until the end of the year to define “meaningful use,” which physicians will have to meet by 2011, when the incentives kick in.

Without a definition, those in the market for an EMR are left wondering if waiting might be the best option, while early adopters wonder if their systems can meet future standards.

So what’s a practice to do?

The experts’ answer: Don’t wait to buy or upgrade just for want of a definition. There are enough clues in the legislation to estimate the definition of “meaningful use.”

Experts say it will be easier on you, and your practice, to buy now and tweak later. “Time is your enemy,” said Mark Garsombke, an attorney with the Milwaukee law firm Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek. Waiting to buy could mean a delay in qualifying for incentives, he said.

Details included in the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH Act, the provision of the ARRA that created the incentives, have hinted at what physicians can expect in the meaningful use definition:

• Qualifying EMR systems must be certified. Pat Wise, RN, vice president of health information services for the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, said because the Certification Commission for Health Information Technology is currently the only certifying body up and running, she expects early meaningful use requirements will include CCHIT certification.
• Systems must include electronic prescribing. According to Wise, the administration has made clear that e-prescribing will be one of the key components of meaningful use. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is already offering incentives to physicians who e-prescribe.
• Systems must be used for quality reporting. Incentive programs already exist under CMS’s Physician Quality Reporting Initiative. The meaningful use guidelines are expected to include and build on those performance measures.
• Systems must be capable of exchanging information with other systems. The HITECH Act makes it clear the administration is still working toward a national health data exchange whose foundation will be EMRs.

And experts say there are steps practices can take to help them ensure their system is compatible with the future meaningful use definition:

• Talk to vendors. Grill them on what steps they are willing to take to ensure their clients will meet meaningful use. Ask them to put any promises in writing. Practices using small vendors should get contingency plans in writing in the event the vendor goes out of business or is bought out by another company.
• Focus attention on the practice holdouts if you’re already using EMRs. Many practices that don’t require EMR use have doctors still using paper. Now is a good time to get to the core of their concerns with using health IT, Quirk said. Incentives will be available on a per-physician basis, so physicians not using the systems will be leaving money — up to $44,000 per doctor — on the table, he said.
• Start e-prescribing. Incentive money is already available to physicians who prescribe electronically. This is sure to be part of the meaningful use requirements. The sooner you start, the quicker you’ll be up and running by 2011, experts say.
• Begin participation in the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative. This is also something that is sure to be a requirement and something physicians can get paid to do now.
• Explore additional functionalities, such as clinical decision support tools. Wise said it’s likely there will be some level of clinical decision support use required. Many systems don’t have these functions. Computerized physician order entry is also likely to be required.

Wise said even if you want to wait until the definitions for meaningful use are released to make the purchase, doing your homework now can save time later. There are many systems out there as well as functions existing EMR users could add. It’s always a good idea to compare prices and research vendors.

“That kind of preparatory work can be absolutely invaluable,” Wise said. “And that kind of preparatory work can also make the difference between making a good, wise selection when you do decide to make the purchase as opposed to a selection that might come back and not give you the functionality that you desire.”

Above article published on

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2009/06/15/bica0615.htm

Health care facilities in the region are joining a nationwide effort to make medical records available electronically to cut down on costs and waste and allow medical providers in different areas access to patients’ medical records.

Many facilities in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota already access medical records electronically or are in the process of developing, testing and implementing Electronic Medical Record (EMR) or Personal Health Record (PHR) systems.

Making health records available online in the electronic form of PHRs, which include medical histories updated by patients, could result in industry savings of $13 billion to $21 billion a year in the U.S., according to a November article in the Journal of American Health Information Management Association.

Rural health care facilities have lagged behind in converting to electronic records systems.

Lynette Dickson, program director for the State Office of Rural Health in North Dakota, said federal stimulus package funds aimed at supporting the advancement of health information technology will put pressure on some rural health care facilities that have not developed EMR plans.

A recent survey conducted by the Center for Rural Health to assess the adoption status of EMR systems in North Dakota found that larger hospitals use EMRs at a much higher rate than rural facilities.

“There’s an obvious rural/urban divide amongst health care facilities with regard to IT staff support and financial resources as well as much-needed planning activities,” Dickson said. “Although one third of rural hospitals indicated they had some level of EMR adoption, we know most don’t have a fully-functional system. We’re cautiously optimistic that stimulus package money may provide some grant opportunities to facilitate adoption of EMRs.”

Dickson said that most stimulus package dollars for Health Information Technology (HIT) will fund Medicare and Medicaid incentives to encourage the adoption of a certified EMR system capable of exchanging information from site to site. The incentive programs will be phased out over time, replaced with financial penalties for providers not using EMRs. Stimulus funds will also be available to states to set up loan and grant programs to cover planning and implementation costs of Health Information Exchange (HIE) systems. Dickson said this puts the onus on states to support the effort as matching funding from the state will be required to access federal dollars.

Dickson said the challenge of covering up-front costs to invest in an EMR system remains a challenge for rural providers. North Dakota’s Health Information Technology Steering Committee has been in place for more than two years, but is made up entirely of volunteers and its power is limited. Dickson said North Dakota doesn’t have a state office

Responsible for providing oversight for HIT or HIE. Caryn Hewitt, executive partner for health information management at MeritCare Health System, said MeritCare began establishing EMRs 10 years ago because of the size of its market area. MeritCare — North Dakota’s largest private employer — encompasses 20 locations in the Fargo-Moorhead area, 19 regional Minnesota clinics, eight regional North Dakota clinics and a regional hospital in Thief River Falls, MN.

“We have about 1.5 million patient records online,” Hewitt said. “No matter where a patient or provider is, if they have access to the MeritCare system, they can access those records.”

Hewitt said the benefits of MeritCare’s electronic records also reach rural hospitals that haven’t yet implemented an EMR system because MeritCare providers work in the hospitals and MeritCare clinics are often located near hospitals.

The cost of licenses, software installation and upgrades, equipment and training have prohibited some health care providers from making electronic records available. Privacy and security issues as well as individual state regulations also come into play. Many of these issues will be addressed through government HIT initiatives.

Sioux Falls-based Avera Health and Sanford Health have spent years developing and testing electronic medical records systems and utilize EMR and PHR systems in portions of their health care systems. Avera Health, which encompasses five regional centers and more than 230 locations in South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska, plans to use EMRs system-wide by late 2010. All but one of Avera’s hospitals currently utilize EMRs and a recently-acquired hospital in Marshall, MN, is scheduled to implement EMRs in November.

Avera Health began offering online appointments at its McGreevy Clinic Avera locations three years ago as a step towards adding a PHR system. Current economic conditions will affect how quickly PHR software is implemented.

Sanford Health, which serves nearly 100 communities in parts of South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska, recently completed a three-month PHR pilot. My Sanford Chart will allow patients to review clinic visits, request prescription renewals and schedule appointments online. Dr. Dan Heinemann, chief medical officer of the health services division at Sanford Health, said the pilot program allowed Sanford to fine tune the system before making it available to patients.

“PHR gives physicians another avenue of communication,” Dr. Heinemann said. “Patients can view their chart at night, weekends and schedule appointments when it’s most convenient for them. This paves the way for physicians to look at e-visits and e-health.”

Sanford officials said its PHR system utilizes a highly encrypted and secure process and is more time and cost effective.

“As our system develops, patients will be able to complete their own patient history before they come to the office and can be seen immediately because the physician already knows why they’re there,” Dr. Heineman said.

South Dakota’s eHealth Collaborative, initiated last spring, will result in a long-range plan to help facilitate information sharing between the state’s health care organizations and systems.

“Business owners are very interested in managing health care costs,” said Jim Veline, Avera Health’s chief medical information officer. “Electronic systems provide many cost-saving benefits.”

Above article published on

http://www.prairiebizmag.com/articles/index.cfm?id=9626&section=News

TORONTO, Ontario’s doctors say a study released today by the Ontario Health Quality Council (OHQC) illustrates the need to remain vigilant in getting every Ontarian a family doctor and expanding access to Electronic Medical Records (EMRs).

“Every person in the province deserves to have access to the care and xpertise of a physician, and Ontario’s doctors will accept nothing less,” aid Dr. Suzanne Strasberg, President of the Ontario Medical Association OMA). “Since 2004, more than 630,000 people that didn’t have a doctor now do. e are very proud of what we have accomplished but we know there is more work to be done.” In the most recent agreement, Ontario’s doctors and the government committed to work together to find another 500,000 patients a physician. Dr. Strasberg suggested that one of the most effective ways to achieve this objective is through the expansion of collaborative care models. Ontario’s doctors have long advocated for collaborative health care teams where various health professionals work together under one roof to provide care to a large number of patients.

“The evidence is clear, when physicians and other health professionals work together, not only is there a more comprehensive level of care provided to patients, but it can reduce the strain on the health care system.”

The OHQC study also highlights the importance of EMRs in ensuring continuity of care to patients. EMRs are a critical component in the evolution of the province’s health care system, which is why the OMA has been pushing for the expansion of them into every doctor’s office across the province. To date, more than 3,000 family physicians in Ontario have EMRs in their offices and by the end of 2009, 4 million patients will have an EMR.

“Doctors who use Electronic Medical Records report patient safety, continuity of care and quality of care have improved,” said Dr. Strasberg. “Ensuring that EMRs are available in every doctor’s office is an important

step towards improving and strengthening Ontario’s health care system.”

Above article published on

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/June2009/09/c4722.html

Patient privacy rights are at the heart of research by a University of Virginia professor.

The Federal Stimulus Package is pumping $20 billion into the healthcare system to move it completely to electronic records, but state privacy laws may slow that down in Virginia and across America.

Electronic Medical Records (or EMRs) have been around since the 1970’s, but today less than half of America’s hospitals have a basic EMR system.

Virginia is one of several states with strict privacy protection for hospital patients.

“There is this idea that there may be identity fraud, in particular medical identity fraud,” says University of Virginia Economics professor Amalia Miller.

While the enhanced rules should protect hospital patients in Virginia, at the same time, they could slow down vital sharing of information between hospitals.

“One of the big benefits of going electronic about sharing information could be suppressed or blocked, and this would be an unintended consequence of these strong privacy regulations,” Miller says.

Miller says the investment in a widespread switch to electronic records would not only save lives, but up to $34 billion nationwide.

“It could save money by reducing costs spent on the administration of the hospital,” she says, “reducing time that staff has to spend on paperwork.”

Miller also says there are worries that the switch could compromise privacy.

“You can imagine with certain conditions, patients or individuals wouldn’t want their insurers to know, they wouldn’t want their employers to know if they’re getting health insurance from their employer,” says Miller.

Still she believes lawmakers can find a way to computerize records and still give patients the privacy they want.

“I think it’s important for policy makers to think about the potential conflict between these goals and to navigate them together, rather than think about them in place in isolation where they might be acting against each other,” Miller says.

A standard EMR system costs a hospital more than $17,000 annually per bed.

Miller says stricter privacy rules mean the system is even more costly because of the enhanced privacy filters and other design factors that must go into the system.

Above article published on http://www.nbc29.com/Global/story.asp?S=10473911&nav=menu496_2_1

Electronic medical record (EMR) software is the wave of the future for healthcare providers. Patient medical records can be extensive and complex, containing patient demographic and contact information, a summary of medical history, and documentation of each event, including symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome. Relevant documents and correspondence are also included. With EMR software, it is possible to store the entire medical record, or any part of it, on a computer. The advantage that EMR software has over traditional paper systems is that they provide greater data availability, transfer, and retrieval. This article will first look at the important components of EMR systems in general, and then it will look at three vendors who not only contain these components, but provide orthopedic practice-specific functionality as well.

The following are important components when considering EMR systems:

• Functionality
  Often, lower-priced EMRs have limited functionality. However, you don’t want to pay for functionality you are not going to use.
• Data structure and organization
  How easy is it to retrieve the information you need? Is there a summary page that is easy to get to and that provides the information you need?
• Record management
  Does the system allow you to create useful reports? Can you scan numerous paper documents into the patient’s chart? If so, how easy is it to review these documents?
• Database integrity
  Are there mechanisms in place to maintain database integrity?
• Data export to other systems
  Does the system use a standardized transfer protocol such as HL7?
• HIPAA compliance
  To be HIPAA compliant, there must be a log of anyone who has viewed or modified the chart, and any modifications of the medical record must be traced. Also, each note, lab report, and scanned document entered into the record must be signed by a physician.
• Communication
  Does the system allow you to fax, mail, or email a recently completed not to other physicians? Is there a way to make hard copies of the chart, and can the software communicate with other offices?

OmniMD offers an EMR solution that addresses the vast information needs of the orthopedics specialty. The orthopedic specific EMR includes clinically-defined templates for common orthopedic complaints, history of present illness, and review of systems. The system also includes orthopedics specific ICD and CPT Codes that are used to capture accurate charges and quickly generate electronic bills. To meet the needs of the orthopedic practice, OmniMD offers the following point-and-click orthopedic-specific templates and forms:

• Fracture Visit
• Initial Adult Ortho Visit
• Orthopedic X-Ray/Plan
• Orthopedic SOAP Note
• Podiatry Visit
• Spine Exam
• Accidental Injury Form
• CMG Extremity Measurements
• Neck & Back History
• Neck & Back A/P
• Neck & Back Physical Exam

As medical specialties and sub-specialties become more complex and the medical field becomes more and more dependent on computers, the pressure on medical practices to keep up with technology will become overwhelming. EMRs are here to stay, and their return on investment is undeniable. EMRs are the wave of the future, and with so many options to choose from, every practitioner should be able to find the system that meets every need.

Above article published on

http://www.medcompare.com/spotlight.asp?spotlightid=121

NEW YORK – The market for electronic medical record data transfer equipment and applications, valued at $575 million in 2008, is forecast to reach $1.6 billion in 2013, according to a study by research firm Kalorama Information.

Driven by the growing use of EMRs in hospitals and physician offices, this segment of the patient monitoring market will grow 23.3 percent annually through 2013, notes the report, “High-Tech Patient Monitoring Systems Markets (Remote and Wireless Systems, Data Processing, EMR Data Transfer).”

Increased use of EMRs and high-tech patient monitoring systems is a key piece of President Barack Obama’s plan to fix the ailing healthcare system, the report notes, because they have the potential to improve patient outcomes and satisfaction, provide cost savings and more efficient use of healthcare resources and reduce hospitalizations.

Patient monitoring produces a vast amount of data, but this data can be disjointed and located in different places, Kalorma notes. EMRs give patients and physicians greater freedom, improves accuracy and should result in better outcomes as critical records are all in one easily transportable record.

Home healthcare agencies and nursing homes have been slower to adopt EMR systems due in part to the high cost of implementation.

In 2004, President George Bush established the position of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology within the Office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. This position was created to help achieve the president’s goal of most Americans having access to an interoperable EMR by 2014. In support of this idea, various regions and states have formed health information exchange projects that are essentially centralized repositories for patients’ EMRs, the research shows.

“And now, President Obama has made EMRs a significant part of his healthcare initiative,” the report states. “This should be a boon to the industry, though there are some hurdles to overcome first.”

“While the idea is admirable and achievable in the future, there are significant hurdles at present,” said Bruce Carlson, publisher of Kalorama Information. “EMRs must be accessible to healthcare providers, but also be secure. Security and privacy concerns, a lack of fully adopted standards, problems with inputting old patient data, competition between healthcare providers who may not want data shared with rivals and significant implementation costs are all hindering progress.”

Above article published on

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/market-emrs-pegged-16-billion-2013

BOSTON – A new study suggests that patients are open to having electronic medical records play a more central role in their care.

A research team at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston led the study to determine how patients feel about converting to EMRs. Key findings suggest patients want full access to all of their medical records, are willing to make some privacy concessions in the interest of making them transparent and fully expect that computers will play a major role in their medical care, even substituting for face-to-face care.

“Year after year, people have seen information technology transform one industry after another and, more to the point, transform their everyday experiences,” said Stephen Downs, assistant vice president of the health group at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which supported the research through a grant from its Pioneer Portfolio. “This is the age of the iPhone, Facebook and Google Maps, yet healthcare feels very much the same. This study suggests that people are ready for change – they want a modern healthcare experience.”

“We set out to study patient attitudes toward electronic personal health records and other emerging and future electronic health information technologies,” said the study’s lead author, Jan Walker, an instructor in medicine in the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care at Beth Israel and Harvard Medical School. “And we learned that, for the most part, patients are very comfortable with the idea of computers playing a central role in their care.”

Walker said patients not only want computers to bring them customized medical information, but fully expect to be able to rely on electronic technology in the future for many routine medical issues.

“Patients know how busy their doctors are and they want to reserve us for what they really need us for – treating serious illness and conditions,” said senior author Tom Delbanco, MD, the Richard and Florence Koplow-James Tullis Professor of General Medicine and Primary Care at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel. “They may be more than happy to rely on computer protocols and ‘faceless doctors’ to help them manage garden-variety medical problems.”

“The patient’s view is critical,” said Delbanco. “We healthcare professionals think we know what it is, but we’re often too arrogant to ask. We want our healthcare system to be as patient-centered as possible, and patients have broad and deep experience with technology in other sectors of their lives.”

The study held focus groups in Boston, Portland, Maine; Tampa, Fla; and Denver. The locations were selected to represent various geographic areas, include rural and urban populations and incorporate ethnic and cultural diversity. Six of the eight groups (consisting of nine to 12 participants each) were made up of consumers. The last two groups were made up of healthcare professionals from Boston and Denver, assembled to provide perspectives on the role of health information technology and compare their opinions with those of consumers.

In each case, participants were asked how they organize the information they need to manage their health and medical care and explored how they would ideally like to manage and use this information, including how technologies could address any gaps.

“The discussions showed that, for the most part, consumers want computers to take into account their personal profiles in order to bring them customized information and advice,” said Walker. “They also expect that technologies will ‘watch’ over them, monitoring their health and giving them real-time feedback, including communicating with clinicians when needed. Participants also said they expect computers to act as ‘personal coaches,’ and to foster self care.”

“It seems that as the population ages and finds itself facing more illness and serious medical conditions, privacy of health information becomes much less important to patients than it is when they are healthy,” Walker said. “Patients are willing to trade some privacy in order to have records fully available in emergency settings and available to new caregivers as well as to multiple clinicians.”

Above article published on

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/study-reveals-patients-attitudes-toward-emr-conversion