Pros and Cons of Implanting a Chip into a Patient to Store an EHR - Article Example

The Chip is argued to contain no medical records, but it is the code in it that is revealed – and only in the doctor’s office or hospital. The code is argued to be unlocked by a healthcare provider to access that person’s medical information (Mollar, 2009). However, there is much to think about other than the safety of EHR. For example, with the announcement of intentions to introduce EHR, different companies have shown interest in venturing into the business of making the gadget. This is evidenced by the way these companies are making partnerships with various healthcare institutions. For example, “Emdat announced a partnership with IBJI, MediRew announced a new client with Bon Secours Charity Health System, and Philips announced the implementation of its enterprise-wide clinical informatics technology at Baptist Health South Florida (BHSF) among many others” (Miliard, 2012, Para 2, 3 and4). In this regard, it can be argued that the issue of EHR is endorsed by certain forces which among them include entrepreneurial urge.

Pros and cons of EHR

Proponents of EHR argue that EHR could help reduce errors in medical records (Mollar, 2009). To some extent, this can be argued to be true because no doubt that hand wrath and written subject to errors and omissions. It is also argued that, with written records, the likelihood of losing records is high. Cases of lost or missing files or files being misplaced have been reported in the past. Additionally, catastrophes like fire and floods have in the past destroyed physical records. In light of this, digital record is argued to store records for a long time (Mollar, 2009). It can also help keep health information that patients tented forget with time.

EHRs are also argued to make healthcare cost-efficient by way of consolidating all data in one safe place (Mollar, 2009). Formerly, paper-based records are kept in different places, and accessing them all takes a lot of time and probably money. With the use of EHR, such incidences are argued to be a thing of the past. Lastly, EHR can save lives. VeriChip, developed by VeriChip Corporation is believed to have worked appropriately, and it enables speedy identification of at-risk patients (Halamka et al. 2006). This enables access to their medical history, something that paves the way for quick diagnosis and treatment, particularly in emergencies.

On the other hand, EHR can lead to loss of interpersonal aspect in healthcare. In handwritten records, doctors interact with patients it obtains necessary information from them. They are lecanorate what the patient says with their own personal obsess also argued that EHR threatens patient’s privacy (Mollar, 2009). Not many people in this era are comfortable with their medical history revealed to other people. Besides, unless laws become strict on issues emanating from the use of EHR, EHR can be used against a person in some cases. For example, some employers would require employees or applicants to provide their medical history, something that can jeopardize such a person’s employment, especially if the record is to be obtained from EHR. Other areas of potential impropriety include insurance coverage and college scholarships (Mollar, 2009).

EHR can also be inefficient. Not all clinics’ EHR systems are compatible with other clinics’ systems, and this can lead to the inefficiency of EHR (Mollar, 2009). With the new era of technology, people can hack and access the patient’s medical history. This may come in several ways including passwords disclosure, stolen identities, and blackmail.

Conclusion

Although EHR has the potential of improving healthcare provision, a lot needs to be evaluated to convince the American people that it is good for their medical care and that issues emanating from its use can be properly dealt with.