The New York Times recently addressed the concern about EHR usability:
The need to improve the usability of computerized records is clearly evident — and has been for some time. A 2009 study by the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, found that electronic health record systems were often poorly designed, and so could “increase the chance of error, add to rather than reduce work flow, and compound the frustrations doing the required tasks.”
How do we solve this issue? The answer may be thoughtful standardization.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I think this article makes a valid point on standardization. There is definitely a danger with EHRs being so different that data cannot be transfered from one doctor to another, but over-standardizing could also prevent critical innovation down the road. It’s a very fine line to walk. I also wonder if the EHR meangful use incentives are actually beneficial if the usability of EHRs is less than stellar. I think it opens up the door to a far less efficient health system.
The big question within standardization is ‘standardization of what?’. You cannot expect the ultimate standardization of everything unless we create a ‘National EHR’ – which is unlikely and unthinkable.
Therefore, in term of interoperability, there are other models being explored; perhaps that same as the way we have some semblance of standardization for ePrescription via Surescripts. More important is accessibility of data among care providers in the chain of continuum of care; be it via CCD/CCR or HIE for example. I am not sure what will emerge, but something will.
As certain pockets start seeing demonstrable benefits, others will follow and I suspect a ‘de facto’ standard will emerge by consensus rather than imposing standards.
Leave a Comment