Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovetv
Electronic Medical Records are highly over-rated, and it's a great way for the patient and his/her test results and diagnostic findings to get BURIED in Software Hell......
|
I've got to disagree with you on this point a little bit. We activated an EMR in the medical group just a bit before I retired. I was actively involved in developing the module for the eye department. We insisted on several things that would enhance the interaction between provider and patient. One simple thing was to put the keyboard/monitor on a swing-out shelf so that the provider could face the patient while taking notes and discussing the patient's condition. I've noted here that the terminal is located to make that interaction less personal, which I feel is a mistake. It promotes the feeling in the patient that they are interrupting if they speak while the provider is typing.
Other aspects of the entire system were designed to facilitate patient information, such as creating patient access to the clinic via email, which was monitored to be sure that a reply was sent within a specific time frame. Also, each provider was given a special email address made known to patients to facilitate communication. (It helps eliminate the phone call to a patient that goes unanswered or gets a busy signal. We were prohibited from leaving any details on an answering machine, obviously.)
Another benefit was clear records. No more trying to decipher the poor penmanship of some of the providers. , Also, since we had clinics spread over many counties and states, the EMR was a godsend when a patient made an urgent visit. We had all the important information on hand right away. No need to call for a chart or have something faxed.
In short, designed correctly an EMR can enhance patient care and not be a barrier. Note, this system I am describing was not designed for patient billing. It did communicate with the patient billing system only as far as sending the procedure codes.