Technology continues to grow every day and every business looks to improve within their company by updating to the latest improvements. The big question that always is asked is, “Will this advancement be worth the cost for our business in the long run?” In healthcare, one of the biggest changes in technology started years ago and companies are still transitioning today. This change was from paper medical records to electronic medical records. In healthcare, practices look for an important tool to improve patient safety and ways to improve their quality of care for their patients. The convenience of electronic medical records is what made most companies switch to the new technology. Still today, especially privately owned practices, are still
…show more content…
Paper charts are filed by last name in the medical office, which take up space and are not environmentally friendly. Using paper charts requires more employees to handle and support the paper files and also to organize the abundance of papers that need to be filed within. Providers used paper charts for their simplicity, low implementation cost and widespread acceptance. Disadvantages of paper charts include limited availability to one user at a time, frequent illegibility, cannot be accessed remotely, growing too thick, and more. All of this information has now been moved to be electronic without the hassle of paper. The electronic medical record has a wide range of capabilities, which results in a great potential to improve the quality of care. In 2015, a number of statistics were compared between traditional paper records (TPR) and electronic medical records (EHR). In organization, paper records are often incomplete and results in repetitive tests and treatments, while EHR reduced redundancies and allows easy access to complete patient history. Paper records need to be faxed or mailed and this wastes time and paper. EHR provides other providers to exchange information quicker electronically. If the doctor is out of the …show more content…
Other barriers that were found included difficulties with the new technology, charges and support for the systems, electronic data exchange, financial incentives, and physician’s attitudes (Miller & Sim, 2016, p 119). Cost of the technology is something a business takes into consideration first and foremost. Implementing the electronic medical records initially has high up-front costs. Not only do you have to purchase the system, but there are also initial set up fees and the company needs to invest in laptops for all providers in the practice. In most practices that were studied, they found an initial cost that ranged from $16,000 to $36,000 per physician and there could also be other costs included (Miller & Sim, 2016, p.119). In the beginning of the change, it takes the user awhile to get up to speed with the new technology and all the features that go along with it. This is considered a cost because there is a loss of time to see patients while they have to be in training for the technology. While physicians get used to the transition, they spend more time in the room with the patient documenting the necessities. This doesn’t allow the company to bring in as much revenue in the beginning of the
Paper charts are filed by last name in the medical office, which take up space and are not environmentally friendly. Using paper charts requires more employees to handle and support the paper files and also to organize the abundance of papers that need to be filed within. Providers used paper charts for their simplicity, low implementation cost and widespread acceptance. Disadvantages of paper charts include limited availability to one user at a time, frequent illegibility, cannot be accessed remotely, growing too thick, and more. All of this information has now been moved to be electronic without the hassle of paper. The electronic medical record has a wide range of capabilities, which results in a great potential to improve the quality of care. In 2015, a number of statistics were compared between traditional paper records (TPR) and electronic medical records (EHR). In organization, paper records are often incomplete and results in repetitive tests and treatments, while EHR reduced redundancies and allows easy access to complete patient history. Paper records need to be faxed or mailed and this wastes time and paper. EHR provides other providers to exchange information quicker electronically. If the doctor is out of the …show more content…
Other barriers that were found included difficulties with the new technology, charges and support for the systems, electronic data exchange, financial incentives, and physician’s attitudes (Miller & Sim, 2016, p 119). Cost of the technology is something a business takes into consideration first and foremost. Implementing the electronic medical records initially has high up-front costs. Not only do you have to purchase the system, but there are also initial set up fees and the company needs to invest in laptops for all providers in the practice. In most practices that were studied, they found an initial cost that ranged from $16,000 to $36,000 per physician and there could also be other costs included (Miller & Sim, 2016, p.119). In the beginning of the change, it takes the user awhile to get up to speed with the new technology and all the features that go along with it. This is considered a cost because there is a loss of time to see patients while they have to be in training for the technology. While physicians get used to the transition, they spend more time in the room with the patient documenting the necessities. This doesn’t allow the company to bring in as much revenue in the beginning of the