What are the advantages and disadvantages of electronic medical records?
To pinpoint the advantages or disadvantages of electronic medical records and the software solutions that enable them, you first need to know what they are.
Electronic medical records are digitised versions of patient notes and personal details, with information such as demographics and psychographics. These records are managed through electronic patient records (EPR) software – sometimes called electronic health records (EHR).
You might be wondering why electronic medical records are such a talking point. The NHS is pushing for trusts across England – and leaning on devolved NHS partners elsewhere in the UK – to onboard these solutions in all hospitals as a way to optimise the administrative and data processes involved in managing patient care.
In this article we will explore the impact of electronic records on the quality of care and any supporting evidence, before discussing the benefits and the challenges that face healthcare professionals and their organisations.
Do electronic medical records improve quality of care?
Yes, they do. This may seem a facetious or overly simplistic response, but healthcare organisations and the NHS in particular wouldn’t be as heavily pursuant of electronic medical records and the associated software if it wasn’t serving the greater good. Below I explain exactly how electronic records improve quality of care.
How do electronic health records improve patient care?
The main way that electronic health records (EPR/EHR) improve patient care is by operating as one big system of knowledge sharing. EPR solutions are seen as a central hub, or terminal, through which all associated sources of knowledge and care are passed. Through a combination of apps, modules and portals, good EPR software can connect primary, secondary, tertiary and social care systems.
This allows for one longitudinal record, so every health and care professional is operating from the same information. It also encourages integrating data from other healthcare organisations, or internal departments, with the end goal of less time spent on admin and data entry, and more time for the patients themselves.
Saving time is the chief goal of electronic medical records. Time can be recovered from long-winded data sharing and communication processes. Better data management also allows staff to cut time wasted searching for files, re-writing them, or amending incorrect information. The knock-on effect of freeing up time is less burden on staff, allowing them to repurpose their time towards patients, education, or rest – all of which are important.
Comparing paper-based with electronic records
EPR software especially helps with paperwork. Electronic medical records as opposed to paper-based medical records are far easier to maintain, to store, to amend, and to share. That intelligence moving at speed is important for quicker diagnosis and treatment, but also incredibly important for other Trusts and providers if they’re treating an individual elsewhere in the country rather than their home region.
We’ll expand more on all of the above in the benefits section still to come, but for now why not read another of our blogs about electronic medical records and specifically patient record management.
What are the benefits of electronic medical records?
So, what are the advantages of electronic medical records? The main benefit is improved quality of care. This is achieved through better data recording and management, as well as optimised communication.
What are the benefits of EHR?
“How does EHR reduce medical errors?” I hear you say. An electronic health record solution (software) serves as the database for patient information, associated data about their activities within the healthcare system, and a communication platform for sharing this information and engaging with it/other clinicians about it.
Better data management: More accurate data means better clinical decision making, which leads into better treatment and better care outcomes. This all comes from the foundation of reliable data input though.
It’s also quicker and simpler access a patient’s information – often with solutions providing real-time access. Less time on this process means more time to focus on patient care. More time invariably improves both the care quality and clinical safety, and the patient experience benefits.
Contrast this with the old paper-based approach. Software isn’t free, but paper is costly and requires physical shipping/delivery. Digital reduces that burden. No more patient notes on paper or observations (hospital). Everything can add into the patient record. Also no printing letters unless necessary, no printing prescriptions unless necessary; small operations that happen in such high quantities they are often overlooked.
One central record: Having one central record means everybody is operating from the same ‘hymn sheet’ so to speak. A singular take with no discrepancies allows for consistent assessment and thinking about patient care, but it also improves data accuracy.
The digital approach through a software solution is about making it easier to see the data after input; to assess, utilise, but also to amend in the event of errors. Reducing errors is perhaps the most crucial part of this process, and many eyes looking at the same information will spot errors quickly.
Improved communication: Communication is not just improved but increased. EPR/EHR systems encourage communications and dialogue between healthcare professionals, departments, and Trusts. The speed of interaction with electronic messaging is instantaneous, which is a gargantuan step forward from paper-based communication via typed letters posted across a region or a country.
There’s also the software to software communication element. Interoperability refers to the integration of healthcare solutions and the willingness of these computer programs to communicate information to other sources. In an ideal world, all solutions are integrated (via APIs) so that there is full transparency and the highest calibre of knowledge about a patient, and EPRs are striving to do just that.
Time is money: If you save time, you save money. Some of that is on how much treatment is needed for a patient, some of that is on how long you need staff on shift and to be paying them. Greater efficiency is a permanent goal of a healthcare provider, and with electronic medical records there’s a simplification of the patient data management process to reduce unnecessary administrative burden and distraction from clinicians. This means more time for the patients and importantly more time for themselves.
The NHS is a great example because it has a fairly high staff turnover and difficulties with staff retention. Some of this is due to pay but mostly it’s due to burnout from being overburdened for a long period of time. Supported staff stay fresh and feel valued, and that’s how they stay in the system and hone their skills and provide world-class care.
The best solutions allow for shared care records; an interoperability approach that encourages multiple organisations to contribute to one longitudinal record so that everyone is operating from a true record of the individual. This allows clinicians to diagnose and treat patients to the highest possible standard.
What are the disadvantages of electronic medical records?
Electronic medical records don’t so much have disadvantages as challenges. There are so many benefits to using these digital solutions that there’s no real disadvantage versus the previous, traditional methods of patient record handling, but it’s not quite as simple as installing a new program on a computer and away you go.
Implementation: The first challenge is implementation. A provider, such as The Access Group, sells a product to a healthcare provider (e.g. an NHS trust). There’s a steady process of establishing the system – cloud-based or on the buyer’s own servers – and then setting up accounts, user permissions, and the right operating procedures.
Healthcare providers often use multiple different solutions within their software ecosystem; a common strategy that pursues the best-in-class healthcare solutions to build the best support network. This can pose a problem at the implementation phase to facilitate the integration. APIs are used to bridge the connection gap between software solutions, and while here at Access we’re very big on interoperability and integrating into existing systems, not all solution providers are as keen. Sometimes some solutions do not permit any connectivity, and that’s a hindrance.
Education: New software requires time and focus to learn how to operate it. There are varying levels of digital literacy across healthcare types and organisations, which means a ‘one size fits all’ approach to teaching people isn’t appropriate. This can be restricted by the resources or staff availability of the solution provider, but also there’s the time taken. This impacts and intrudes upon the care schedule, and it’s a fine balance to maintain high quality healthcare while ensuring staff are fully capable of using new tools and solutions – else risk errors down the line.
Cost: All software costs, but it’s the challenge for a financial officer within a healthcare organisation to ensure that an affordable deal is brokered and that there is return on investment through efficiency savings.
It’s also important to make sure that the electronic medical record solution is not going to become outdated within a couple of years, as that’s highly wasteful. An evolving solution is the ideal, or at least something that can survive 5+ years.
This concludes our look at the advantages and disadvantages of electronic medical records. While the benefits are plentiful, there are challenges to remain aware of in the pursuit of these software solutions. For more information on the subject, you can read our blog on electronic health records explained.
