The EMR Use by MS's - Essay Example

Using EMR’s in a Physician’s Office Practice The use of EMR’s in the physician’s office has been slowed in the past decade due to the different typesof physicians’ needs, cost, and the difficulty of training physicians and medical staff on their use. This newsletter article argues that these concerns have been declining as better software and hardware have become available. The emergence of HIPAA legislation’s requirements has placed an additional impetus for the adoption of EMR’s, although some provisions relating to hand-written records have given our practice a reprieve for the time being.

One can expect HIPAA to require this in the future, which also means that records need to be both accessible and private (Mandi, 2001). Although EMR’s have grown to become easier to adopt into a practice, and more flexible, there is nevertheless a significant learning curve for the medical staff and physicians, and a series of other issues which must be considered in (1) deciding to adopt an EMR system for an up-to-now written/paper-based practice, and (2) to adapt to the requirements of HIPAA and the competitive environment in order to make the changeover (Miller, 2004).

The primary benefit of EMR’s is the ability to provide records quickly for a patient, which can speed up both a physician’s access to records (both in terms of time and completeness), and to communicate those records to stakeholders, such as patients and hospitals. (McDonald, 1997). A second key benefit is the ability, once on a digitized record, to enhance the speed and accuracy of billing. Billing carries two key considerations: is the billing accurate (i.e. does it capture the actual procedures performed), is it complete (i.e. are all billable procedures included—a big source of potential additional revenue for many practices), is it timely (i.e. how quickly does it get communicated from the physician’s practice to the third-party payer) and how much additional work will be required in order to complete the claim?

The last of these four points can sometimes be the most difficult for a paper-based physician’s office practice, as all healthcare professionals know that they can get tied up on the phone and with back-and-forth traffic with the third party insurer on specific claims. In short, the more information available, the more likely that the claim will be accepted.Third-party coding has now become a big business. Those practices that are able to send digital files to onshore or offshore coding facilities generally find a better record of billing (i.e. more procedures billed, higher accuracy, fewer call-backs) (Wang, 2002).

One can choose to adopt a hybrid system, in which the physician’s group still has some paper records, then has coders and transcribers. This adds cost, time and inaccuracy to the system. A better solution is to have the medical staff move to a ‘paperless’ system, in which the patient data is entered and retrieved electronically. This is the better solution, but it requires that medical staff change some routines and learn how to use computer systems. It is not enough to say “let’s adopt it,” then when it arrives, turn to the secretaries and nurses and say “you use it.

”In addition to cost, are there any other reasons for the physicians to take the time to use it? Better patient care can be a realistic outcome. Patient outcomes can be improved through fact-checking, associating new drug prescriptions with potential side effects or co-reactivity to already-taken drugs, and to supplying the patient’s record to the hospital for acute in-patient care needs (Tierney, 1995).Works CitedMandi, K. S. (2001). Pulbic Standards and patients control: how to keep electronic medical records accessible but private.

BMJ , 283-287.McDonald, C. (1997). The Barriers to Electronic Medical Record Systems and How to Overcome Them. J Am Med Informatics Ass , 213-221.Miller, R. a. (2004). Physicians’ Use Of Electronic Medical Records: Barriers And Solutions. Health Affairs , 116-126.Tierney, W. O. (1995). Toward Electronic Medical Records That Improve Care. Annals of Internal Medicine , 725-726.Wang, S. (2002). A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care. Am J of Med , 397-403.