The Pros And Cons Of Electronic Health Records

There are many arguments and discussions on whether to use electronic health records or personal health records. Electronic health records are inputted onto the computer and reachable as long as someone has the information to log into them. Personal health records contain the same type of information as electronic health records but they are only for patients. The patients manage and set them up. Both health records include diagnoses, medications, immunizations, family medical histories, and provider information. Electronic health records have the potential to improve the delivery of health care services. However, in the United States, physicians have been slow to adopt such systems. This study assessed physicians' adoption of outpatient electronic health records, their satisfaction with such systems, the perceived effect of the systems on the quality of care, and the perceived barriers to adoption. (Shekelle PG, 2006) (Parr 1) Electronic health records are built to collect data in a provider’s office and is a broader view of a patient. They contain information about the clinicians that the patient visits. Other clinicians involved with the patients care can also access the information to help provide the patient with the most efficient care. In my opinion, I would use an electronic health record
Not all of their providers have the same health records. If they were in Mexico and needed to know what the patient was allergic to or if the producer was okay to move on with they wouldn’t be able to know any of that because the file is at their original physician in the file cabinet. Some people would rather take the chance of only having the file at their physician’s because it makes them feel secure about their personal information. Others, like me, want to have electronic health records that way someone doesn’t give me an injection of something that I am allergic to if I am unconscious. (HealthIT.gov)