The healthcare sector is evolving every day with the advancing technology leading to a transition from traditional paper-based medical records to Electronic Health Records (EHR). As technology advances, many hospitals are adopting Electronic Health Records that meet the needs and goals of the healthcare facilities (Critical Data, 2016). This essay will compare and contrast the two systems, describing their advantages and disadvantages, identifying the users and owners of data, and examining the extent to which the data can be shared.
Paper-Based Medical Records
Paper-based medical records system has been in use for many years and it has played a great role in the healthcare sector (Loretz, 2005). The records have their own advantages and disadvantages despite being in play for a long time.
Advantages
- They do not rely on technology to access, and therefore, physicians are able to access the data without electronic devices (Loretz, 2005).
- They are not vulnerable to electronic breaches since they are stored in physical documents.
Disadvantages
- They are limited to access since they do not depend on technology. Patent data cannot be accessed remotely since the data is stored only in the records department in the hospital, therefore limiting the modern healthcare landscape, which requires access to patients’ data remotely (Loretz, 2005).
- They are vulnerable to theft, loss, or damage. Many healthcare facilities risk losing medical records in case of fire or in case they are exposed to water.
- Reviewing information is time-consuming since the process is done manually and, therefore, could lead to delays in patient care.
- They consume a lot of space since they are bulky and complicated to manage as time goes on. This leads to constraints of space in healthcare facilities (Loretz, 2005).
- Incompatible with modern healthcare systems since they do not support electronic integration with other systems in the healthcare industry.
Electronic Health Records (EHR)
Electronic Health Records systems have come with the advancing technology that aims to solve the limitations that come with paper-based medical records (Kluge, 2020).
Advantages
- They can be easily accessed remotely. Physicians can access medical records from anywhere as long as they have access to the internet, helping them to deliver timely and informed patient care.
- They use strong encryption and access controls to prevent data breaches. Physicians use passwords to access the data, and most of the time, the administrator of the system gives restrictions on the type of data that can be accessed by various healthcare professionals (Critical Data, 2016).
- They make it a fast, efficient way to access data. Physicians are able to get patients’ information within a short time.
- They occupy very little space since they are not bulky and are cost-effective in the long run. Physicians store data in systems connected to computers, and therefore, there is less physical space required by healthcare facilities.
- Easy to integrate with other systems in healthcare. These systems support interoperability required by the modern healthcare system to share data with various healthcare facilities (Kluge, 2020).
Disadvantages
- They require technology infrastructure to access. Physicians need to have electronic devices to be able to access these electronic records, and therefore, it would be difficult for healthcare professionals without electronic devices to access the data (Critical Data, 2016).
- Data stored electronically is vulnerable to security breaches. Hackers pose many cyber security threats to the EHR, and therefore, healthcare facilities need to implement robust security measures (Kluge, 2020).
- The cost of implementing the electronic records is very high. Healthcare facilities are forced to incur the cost of the EHR systems, training of the healthcare employees, and purchasing of the technology infrastructure required to access the data.
Owner and Users of Data
In paper-based medical records, the healthcare facility and the physician who records the patients’ information own the records since the documentation is reflected in the healthcare facility (Loretz, 2005). Only healthcare professionals in that facility are able to access the patient information.
On the other hand, in Electronic Health Records systems, healthcare facilities and organizations implementing the records own the information. Various parties have access to the EHR systems, including doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and administrative staff. Sometimes, these parties are authorized to access the data while within the facility and outside the facility (Kluge, 2020).
Information Sharing
The physical process is involved while sharing information in paper-based medical records since the records are confined to the healthcare facility that records them. When you want to share outside the facility, it might be complex since it involves mailing or copying the records, which could cause privacy and security breaches to the records (Loretz, 2005).
However, the Electronic Health Records system facilitates the sharing of information electronically, making it secure since the data is shared only with authorized users within the healthcare facility. When data is required to be shared with external health facilities, it becomes very easy since the interoperability standards are followed by healthcare professionals (Kluge, 2020). This ensures good coordination of care and gives patients good outcomes from sharing data with external organizations.
In conclusion, transitioning from paper-based medical records to Electronic Health Records is important with the advancing technology and the efficiency that EHR comes with to manage healthcare information. Both systems have their drawbacks and merits, but the merits of EHR out ways its drawbacks since it offers security, efficiency, accessibility, scalability, and interoperability. For healthcare facilities thinking about leveraging technology to improve strategic outcomes and patient care, it is good to understand the differences between the two systems.
References
Critical Data, M. (2016). Secondary Analysis of Electronic Health Records. Germany: Springer International Publishing.
Kluge, E. W. (2020). The Electronic Health Record: Ethical Considerations. United Kingdom: Elsevier Science.
Loretz, L. (2005). Primary Care Tools for Clinicians: A Compendium of Forms, Questionnaires, and Rating Scales for Everyday Practice. United Kingdom: Elsevier Mosby.
write