Nowadays, technological progress has affected almost any area of human’s daily life. Many organizations from different fields are gradually implementing IT-based methods of work. In the medical field, in particular, in the United States, more and more hospitals use EHR (Electronic Health Record), EMR (Electronic Medical Record), and PHR (Personal Health Record). But, some people consider the transition to new technologies to be rather incomprehensible, unreliable, and generally unnecessary. One believes this means a loss of control over the data and that some positions will become unnecessary. In any case, in order to successfully implement IT technologies, one needs to collect information about the challenges, consequences, and the main stages of the transition.
Electronic Health Record (EHR) means that information about medical diseases is stored in a specially authorized center. Medical records are official data, and they may be available to other authorized centers and representatives of medical services, laboratories, government agencies and institutions to improve the quality of healthcare. Electronic Medical Record (EMR) stores information regarding a specific medical area (for example, dentistry), and the custodian is a clinic or a practitioner.
Usually, it looks like an electronic version of the patient’s medical history at a certain hospital. Personal Health Record (PHR) stores some medical information, and the custodian or responsible person for the completeness and quality of the data is the patient himself (or his representative, for example, a family member). The transition to modern technologies means different things for different institutions and personnel. Some people think there is no point in modernization as one does not have any problems working with papers. Sometimes, using current technological tools is considered to be more reliable since it is supposedly easier to control all aspects.
Thus, Ann (2017) admits that the indisposition to use practice guidelines and physician opposition to changes in a workflow are among the most popular reasons for difficulties in IT implementation in the medical area. Many people believe that digital technologies will displace people from their jobs, as computers will be able to do tasks of the personnel even faster; therefore, it is discouraged among the staff. In this case, one needs to collect arguments that such a system will not affect the number of jobs and make the work more comfortable. In other words, it is necessary to influence the staff’s decision by demonstrating the fundamental positive aspects of such a system.
While working with the EMR system, there is an interconnection between the entered data and the program results. It is essential to work only with accurate information and to consider all possible alternatives. Moreover, according to Richard (2017), it is problematic to know the quality of the EMR system unless one does not see the quality of data being proceeded. This formulates a challenge when working with authorized systems, which is especially acute in the medical field since it influences the quality of the services provided. Incorrect interpretation of data can lead to the invalid treatment of the patient, which is unacceptable.
Therefore, all information concerning the patient must be carefully analyzed and compared. Despite the concerns of the staff and the former CEO of the Geneva hospital about the EMR system applying, it has several advantages. Therefore, such a technology will allow physicians to see all the options with a certain disease just by clicking one button and only the right people entering the data (Ann, 2017). This will save time and keep all patient data safe, which is a top priority in terms of confidentiality. Although, according to some information, there are also controversial issues, for example, the problem associated with the fact that working with such a system takes more time. Some studies revealed that such a system might prevent doctors from focusing on patients and impede doctor-patient relations (Peter & Stephen, 2017).
In addition, among the other important concerns of EMR implementation was the problem of limited physicians’ participation in a treatment process, as the digital system would, roughly speaking, do everything. The EMR system is indeed a complex technological tool that can both help and harm if used improperly. According to Sheree et al. (2021), peculiarities of this technology were negatively experienced by nurses but were more suitable for doctors in the primary care sector. Similarly, the way to obtain patient information and errors prevention tools were also positively accepted and widely used.
Consequently, on the example of the Geneva Health System, one can notice that it could be difficult to transit to modern technologies. The successful implementation of the EMR system may be accompanied by some improvements in terms of nursing assistance. Also, if one considers all of the above, another success factor will be the task force group on control issues. In other words, it would be suitable to train a group of specialists who could manage and control the EMR system to deal with errors and problems. The third important success factor is the correct presentation of information to staff about the technology. One must clarify that such a system is followed by a significant positive aspect, making the work process more efficient.
Chamberlain, R. (2017). Planning quality project management of (EMREHR) software products. Taylor & Francis.
Lloyd, S., Long, K., Alvandi, A. O., Donato, J. D., Probst, Y., Roach, J. & Bain, C. (2021). A national survey of EMR usability: Comparisons between medical and nursing professions in the hospital and primary care sectors in Australia and Finland. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 154(104535). Web.
McAlearney, A. S. (2017). Health services mangement: A case study approach. Health Administration Press.
Papadakos, P. J., & Bertman, S. (2017). Distracted doctoring: Returning to patient-centered care in the digital age. Springer.