Electronic health record (EHR) - Literature review Example

EHRs are very quick as there is no need for any paper-work for documenting and sharing of the information and images. Thus, an EHR plays a vital role in evidence based treatment and decision-making without having to go through the manual process (Williams, 2010; National Institutes of Health National Center for Research Resources, 2006). These enable access to the records even from distant areas by means of online networking. The drawback with EHRs is that these are quite expensive but once implemented, these tend to be very cost-effective.

Carter (2008) studied that the concept of EHRs began in 1960s “with the COSTAR system, developed by Barnett at the Laboratory of Computer Science at Massachusetts General Hospital” (p.7). According to him, the earlier efforts provided models and pseudo types on which current “hospital-based and ambulatory” EHRs are based upon. Iakovidis (1998) suggested that EHRs can be used as tools for continuity of care and for collaborative performance of healthcare providers. Many researchers have studied the functionality of EHRs in various contexts.

All studies have led to the conclusion that EHRs are a significant contribution to the medical industry since these have modernized the way patients’ data is stored. Poissant et al. . Research has it that despite significant advantages of EHRs, their adoption rates are progressing rather slowly. Gans et al (2005) conducted a research on the use of EHRs and IT based tools in the health industry and concluded that most health professionals were not incorporating EHRs especially in smaller practices.

Their findings suggested that the adoption of EHRs was making progress at a snail's pace; however, the physicians planned to incorporate them in the coming years. They found that this happened because the practitioners found it difficult to choose and implement EHRs. This research is supported by the findings by Jha et al. (2006) who studied how common are the EHRs in USA’s health sector. They found that the year they conducted the research, the commonness of EHRs was low on scale. According to them, “data on their adoption rate are limited.

” They found that only 23.9 percent of providers were using ambulatory EHRs and 5 percent were using computerized systems. They suggested that what kept physicians from implementing EHRs in their settings was the knowledge gap. These findings are further supported by recent researches as well. For example, Jha et al. (2009) conducted a research to find out if the adoption rate of EHRs in the healthcare sector has increased with passing years. Thus, they conducted a second research in 2009 and came to the same conclusion as in 2006.

They found that “despite a consensus that the use of health information technology should lead to more efficient, safer, and higher-quality care, there are no reliable estimates of the prevalence of adoption of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals.” Jha et al. (2009) conducted a big survey of a number of acute care hospitals to find out the EHR