EHR Software Applications and Electronic Medical Records

Posted by AMS at 30 NOV 6:00 am

What’s the large deal about your patient’s medical records? A patient medical record is one of the most essential documents which you have in a medical center or clinic. That is a huge file of patient charts that you simply have to retain for future use. Today, there is newer technology which will assist medical centers to produce their medical records far more convenient and efficient. Why all medical practices, hospitals, clinics must acquire electronic medical records or EMR? There are many sectors aiming for paperless jobs inside their institutions and companies. That is to reduce the use of labour from the generation of paper-based documents. The use of EMR or electronic medical records provide a lot of advantages in terms of comprehensive and centralized medical records, price reductions, and capability to produce a back up electronic well being care records to lessen the risk of medical facts loss. You possibly can also have faster access to all vital info in case of emergency that may save patients lives.

Medical records had been previously manual where staffs record patient’s information and medical history and condition by hand writing. Now, you have the capacity to automate the entre system without the need to write the info by hand. Manual medical recording takes time, so from the use of EMR you can enhance the productivity of the whole medical center or the medical course of action as well. Electronic Well being Records eliminate the have to retain lots of papers in a huge cabinet wherever essential documents can also be misfiled and even get lost accidentally. With EMR technology, each patient’s health care records are HIPAA protected and secured and accessible with just a click of the mouse.

The information of every patient can be entered to the EMR software product directly and works in combination from the PACS method to improve the productivity within the healthcare facility. Without the use of paper, the capacity to directly encode data towards EMR software creates the facts and facts additional accurate. There also will be no difficulty concerning deciphering illegible handwriting, due to the fact everything is typed in and readable. All medical services and hospitals with EMR may perhaps reduce the risk of malpractice. The patient can also access their electronic wellness record from the hospitals internet site and own wellness records.

One on the drawbacks to this system may be the problem of privacy, but very good Electronic Medical Software can supply a secret password so there’s confidentiality with regards to accessing patient very own records. Not all employees inside the hospital can access the information. Only the staff assigned to this jobs can entry the information. So, for instance other medical advancement, you need to be aware for the two several sides with the story. The EMR software and services can reduce the cost, increase productivity, and save lives of many patients. There is no reason why a medical healthcare facility tend not to want such technology inside their system. This is the opportunity for them to provide the best care and service to all patients in need of fast and reputable medical services.

Source: November 28, 2010 | Author: BooneGomez |

Celebrate 2011 with Huge Savings on PM ULTRA

Posted by admin at 24 NOV 1:47 pm

How to Make Electronic Medical Records a Reality

Posted by AMS at 23 NOV 7:22 am

IN the world of technology, inventors are hailed as heroes. Yet it is more subtle forms of innovation that typically determine the impact of a technology in the marketplace and on society. Clever engineering, smart business models and favorable economics are the key ingredients of widespread adoption and commercial success.

History abounds with evidence. For years, much of what was known as “Yankee ingenuity” was, in fact, the American ability to pursue commercial applications of British inventions, from the Bessemer steel process to the jet engine. Even in computing, which we regard as made-in-America technology, the first stored-program computer, simple programming language and reusable code were pioneered in Britain.

But, of course, computer technology and the industry really flowered in the United States. That happened in no small part because the federal government nurtured the market with heavy investment, mainly by the Defense Department, and by choosing standards, like the Cobol programming language.

Today, Washington is about to embark on another ambitious government-guided effort to jump-start a market — in electronic health records. The program provides a textbook look at the economic and engineering challenges of technology adoption.

In its economic recovery package, the Obama administration plans to spend $19 billion to accelerate the use of computerized medical records in doctors’ offices. Medical experts agree that electronic patient records, when used wisely, can help curb costs and improve care.

The proof is seen in large medical groups, with hundreds or thousands of physicians. They sift, sort and analyze the data from digital records, for example, to better manage the health of patients with costly, chronic conditions like diabetes and heart disease. These larger groups have the scale to invest in information technology, and they are often insurers as well as providers, so they benefit directly from the cost savings.

Yet these large groups are the exceptions in American health care. Three-fourths of the nation’s doctors practice in small offices, with 10 doctors or fewer. For most of them, an investment in digital health records looks like a cost for which they are not reimbursed.

It is scarcely surprising, then, that only about 17 percent of the nation’s physicians are using computerized patient records, according to a government-sponsored survey published last year in The New England Journal of Medicine.

“This is really not a technology problem,” observed Erik Brynjolfsson, an economist at the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s a matter of incentives and market failure.”

That market failure is a principal target of the Obama administration’s plan. A main feature of the legislation calls for incentive payments of more than $40,000 spread over a few years for a physician who buys and uses electronic health records. But the technology is just a tool, one that needs to be used properly to improve health care.

So the legislation states that physicians will be paid only for the “meaningful use” of digital records. The government has not yet defined that term precisely. While the long-term goal is better health for patients, that can take years to measure. Consequently, many health experts predict that the meaningful use will be a requirement to collect and report measurements that can be closely correlated with improved health. Examples would be data for blood glucose, cholesterol and blood pressure levels for diabetes patients.

The legislation, health experts say, seems thoughtfully put together, but the obstacles to success will be daunting. “What’s underappreciated is the implementation challenge,” said Dr. Blackford Middleton, chairman of the Center for Information Technology Leadership, a research arm of Partners Healthcare in Boston.

A crucial bridge to success, according to experts, will be how local organizations help doctors in small offices adopt and use electronic records. The new legislation calls for creation of “regional health I.T. extension centers.” In a letter to the White House and Congress last month, Dr. Middleton and 50 other experts emphasized the importance of these centers and pointed to the Primary Care Information Project in New York City as a model.

The New York project’s brief history, beginning two years ago with $27 million in financing, offers a glimpse of the challenges of wiring small physician practices. The New York team, headed by Dr. Farzad Mostashari, an assistant commissioner in the city’s health department, started by bringing in decision-support experts in medicine to study how doctors work, so the technology would be easier to use. Team members considered writing their own software for simple, Web-based electronic health records, but abandoned that idea once they understood that patient records would have to be tightly linked to billing — a physician’s financial lifeblood.

The project’s 50-member staff provides centralized technical support and education for doctors and others. “There’s no way small practices can effectively implement electronic health records on their own,” Dr. Mostashari said. “This is not the iPhone.”

The staff worked closely with its software supplier, eClinicalWorks, to tweak and tailor the system. They began rolling out the records a little more than a year ago. They are now used by more than 1,000 physicians, mainly in poorer neighborhoods, whose workplaces include two hospital outpatient clinics, 10 community health centers, 150 small group physician practices and one women’s jail, serving a total of one million patients. The rollout is progressing, and the government plan promises to accelerate adoption.

“Our experience here is that it’s just hard,” Dr. Mostashari said. “It’s not impossible.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/business/01unbox.html

The Landscape of Pharma Information & EMR

Posted by AMS at 15 NOV 8:01 am

The Changing Landscape of Pharmaceutical Information & EMR – Changes in the next 10 years.

While recently attending a biotechnology forum, I found myself considering the pharmaceutical landscape and some of the ways it may be changing. The event was Boston’s War on Cancer, organized by Xconomy, during which a number of corporate presentations and discussion sections examined the state and direction of research into effective cancer therapeutics. The pharmaceutical industry is a regulated one, as it should be in my opinion, but the framework imposed by the regulatory process can often make innovative business models and development paradigms difficult to explore.

In the development of cancer therapeutics, companion diagnostic tests that assist in directing preferred treatments are taking on an ever more important role. Even here, regulatory uncertainty has likely hindered development. These tests are often developed by agents outside the pharmaceutical company, though they are often synergistically partnered. In 2004, the FDA identified companion diagnostics as an area of interest as part of its Critical Path Initiative. It followed up in 2005 by offering a concept paper for industry discussion, but actual draft guidance is still not expected until the end of this year at the earliest. I don’t envy the agency and its difficult responsibility of both insuring scientific vigor and maintaining a level of flexibility.

Entering the 21st century
Social media is another arena in which the pharmaceutical companies have been hesitant to venture due to unclear regulatory guidance. Concerns over how pharmaceutical products may be marketed over such venues concerns the FDA, which has yet to issue guidance despite the demand.

Unwilling to wait, pharmaceutical firm Roche has issued its own set of guidelines on how it plans on using the new media. Outside the pharmaceutical companies, there is no restriction. During a socializing break at the Xconomy forum, I learned of Sermo, a social group established and restricted to practicing physicians. Here, doctors can confer with their peers on patient specific topics and treatment options. Social support groups for patients are available and only passively supported by pharmaceutical firms.

What seems to be occurring is a change in the direction of information flow. Companies in the past have had a degree of control over how information on their drug products was distributed, largely through their sales force armies. Now these firms are being forced to become observers as information related to their products, often anecdotal, is distributed and discussed by outside agents that they don’t control.

The advent of widespread electronic medical records is going to accelerate the flow reversal of drug information. A recent study serves as a key example here. In late 2009, the label for the Bristol-Myers Squibb (NYSE: BMY) and Sanofi-Aventis (NYSE: SNY) drug Plavix (clopidogrel) was changed based on concerns that co-use of proton pump inhibitors could affect drug metabolism and efficacy. The study was based on claims data gathered by insurance companies Aetna (NYSE: AET) and Medco Health (NYSE: MHS).

Claims records may be mined, but the process will be far easier once the systems are fully electronic. In 10 years, a good deal of the medical literature may be published by insurers and based on data mining of real patient records. The result will be some real-world comparisons to drug efficacies seen in more controlled clinical settings. The result may indicate efficacy in treating conditions (off-label use), better information on how pharmaceuticals help save over more expensive forms of care (such as repeat hospitalization), but there will also likely be an increase observance of low-level adverse events, resulting in more situations of post market withdrawals, perhaps analogous to what happened to Merck’s (NYSE: MRK) Vioxx (rofecoxib).

As an investor, I want to consider what these possible changes in information sources may mean to industry players. I think it will continue to make pharmaceutical development and marketing a challenge, and perhaps continue to keep pharmaceutical firms relatively cheap in comparison to their historical norms. The loss of control over the pharmaceutical data will make drug marketing more difficult, though I am not sure it will make it more clear to consumers, who are increasingly involved in the decision process themselves.

I’m still content to own a few pharmaceutical firms, because of their enticing valuations and generally good dividend yields, but I prefer the more diversified companies. I also believe that insurers should find themselves gaining a valuable new asset that can be used for the more effective delivery of care services. I’m inclined to be bullish on insurers, but also inclined to continue to wait until there is more visibility resulting from the health-care reform legislation.

US Lags Behind in Health IT

Posted by AMS at 8 NOV 8:00 am

WASHINGTON – Countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the U.K., and Norway have nearly universal adoption of health information technology (HIT) while the U.S. lags painfully behind, according to the man charged with bringing the U.S. up to speed.

David Blumenthal, MD, MPP, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology at the Department of Health and Human Services, made that assessment Friday at an event sponsored by the Alliance for Health Reform and The Commonwealth Fund.

Only about 47% of U.S. medical providers — a bucket term that includes both doctors and nonphysician providers — have adopted some form of health information technology, whereas in countries such as New Zealand doctors are using HIT to quickly compile a list of every one of their patients that is on a particular drug, or has a certain disease, according to a presentation by Robin Osborn of the Commonwealth Fund.

In countries such as Denmark, a patient can sign onto a Web portal and see the details of every hospital stay, doctor’s visit, and medication all with the click of the mouse.

Blumenthal says America has lacked the funds to implement electronic health records and to pay to reward doctors who get on board with the new technology.

Moreover, it has been difficult to convince healthcare workers to ditch the paper that has long defined record keeping and communication in the medical field.

“We have many healthcare workers who are interested in some level about using [electronic records] but fearful about buying the wrong one, implementing it wrong, what if it becomes out of date?” Blumenthal said. “What if it breaks down when the waiting room is full?”

And lastly, aside from a few specific systems — including Kaiser Permanente and the VA — the nation lacks an infrastructure that allows for various electronic medical record systems to communicate with each other.

But most of those barriers will be knocked down, Blumenthal said, thanks in large part to the HITECH Act. The HITECH Act was part of the 2009 economic stimulus bill, which authorized $19 billion to upgrade the nation’s HIT capabilities and to provide incentive payments through Medicare and Medicaid to clinicians and hospitals when they use electronic health records.

The $19 billion included $693 million to create 62 regional expansion centers across the U.S. to assist regions with implementing HIT, as well as $118 million to train over 40,000 new HIT professionals.

Blumenthal said that beginning next year HITECH will reward physicians for using HIT in a “meaningful” way. The stick that goes with that carrot will come several years later when physicians who don’t use HIT will be facing penalties.

By Emily P. Walker , Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today
Published: October 30, 2010