The Electronic Health Records is a means of recording patients’ history electronically as compared to the paper method of dealing with medical records. Though majority of hospitals and doctor’s offices are using the EHR, some are still using the hard-copies way of recording patients’ records. But, they are gradually phasing out of the system. Using the electronic way to keep records of patients’ help healthcare professionals to be able to exchange patients’ medical history, x-rays taken as well as any lab results performed on the patient. The implementation of EHR has given a boost to the medical field, helping hospitals and physicians for better continuity, communication, coordinating and accountability of patient records. Though it may be costly implementing the EHR, it is worth the price and does work well. The NY-based Columbia Memorial Hospital, Hudson, has used the EHR to support its clinical works system since early 2010, serving 26 clinical locations and 300 providers (Rourke, 2011) Using the EHR helps prevent the amount of time spent on a patient upon his visit to the hospital. It narrows down the process of toing and froing from one doctor’s office to the next and the making of phone calls chasing after records. With the introduction of the EHR, it is now much easier and faster to get access to a patient’s much needed and sought after results. It saves time, as doctors no longer need to review long essays about other physicians’ thoughts because of medical alerts and reminders. The computers have some “built-in” intelligence capabilities, such as recognizing abnormal lab results, or potential life-threatening drug interactions. (Koeller, 2002) In a nutshell, the EHR is by far, more efficient, cost saving than hard-copy way of recording patients’ data. Though a lot more has to be done for the successful implementation of the EHR, the advantages are way better than the paper format.
II. Purpose Of The Report