Electronic Medical Records System: Enhancing Patient Care Quality

This report investigates the impact of electronic medical record (EMR) systems on improving patient care quality and reducing costs within the healthcare sector. It highlights the shift towards digitalization in healthcare, driven by government incentives and the need for efficient data management. The study addresses safety concerns related to system failures and miscommunication, emphasizing the importance of proper implementation and monitoring to mitigate risks. It also explores how EMRs can enhance communication between healthcare providers, standardize information transfer, and improve patient safety through the detection and prevention of errors. The research aims to benefit healthcare professionals by streamlining their workflows, improving patient outcomes, and contributing to the overall advancement of medical knowledge, ultimately leading to enhanced service delivery and a more efficient healthcare system. The study employs qualitative analysis and questionnaires to gather insights from both medical staff and patients, focusing on their experiences with EMR systems and their impact on patient care.

Running head: IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 1
Improving Patient Care Through Electronic Medical Record System
Name
University affiliation.

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 2
Improving Patient Care Through Electronic Medical Record System
Introduction
Overview of the research problem.
Since the last president of America, President Obama, electronic health record has
attracted a lot of attention. This has, in turn, stimulated a presentation of about 19 million dollars
in stimulus funds. These funds were provided to help in the growth of the hospitals and ensure
healthcare facilities are digitalized to make patients comfortable and the running of the
healthcare a smooth runway. This also was with the aim of making data available online for
patience and doctors to have easy access (Kern et al., 2012). As a whole, the healthcare sector
has over the years been very slow in adopting changes with the information technology.
Integrating of the current computer systems with the older ones has been a real menace to them.
And for this, questions have aroused to whether having a digital system will empower doctors to
lure them into working better and providing excellent decisions or to lag on their jobs (Carli-
Ghabarou et al., 2013).
However, by the previous studies it is still not clear to whether the impact of electronic
systems will improve the quality of care of patients and reduce cost or this will still be a dangling
investment. Since 1970, the ERHs were available commercially, but it was only recently that the
health information technology sector decided to fully launch it in hospitals (Kern et al., 2012).
As stated earlier, this was catalyzed by the funds which were provided to boost on buying and
equipping hospitals with the required materials. Thus, this is a solution to some of the health
problems that were hard to be treated (Tsai & Bond, 2008). Take an example of cancer, one of
the deadly diseases. Through improved electronic systems, such can be cured, and patient life

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 3
improved. Also, data is stored and kept confidential for the clients and the doctors only (Carli-
Ghabarou et al., 2013).
In spite of these benefits poised, there are many setbacks slowing down how these
systems have been acquired over the years. Previously, less than 18 percent of the united states
health providers have been using the system with only around 5 percent of American hospitals
acquiring them (Tsai & Bond, 2008). In small ambulatory care providers, the rate was even
lower. This, however, has changed, and in a span of a very short time, that is since 2007, the
number of hospitals adopting this new system has dramatically increased (Lehmann & Kim,
2006). For instance, in 2008, when the program started, only about 8% of the number of
hospitals had surged the importance of this system and started using (Hydari, Telang & Marella,
2014). Towards the end of the Obama administration, around 2015, nearly 84% of hospitals were
using the system as per records of the federal data. Despite that, the first step to fully harness the
power of this electronic systems is to adopt. After that, there will be a need for using them when
all health institutions have seen the need of having it (Kern et al., 2012).
Therefore, the research is meant to investigate on how well these improved systems will
improve patient’s standards. Also, the research is meant to identify how costs are cut by the help
of the new systems. Doctors have always had a hard time in bookkeeping and recording patient
activities. With the help of the newly introduced systems, the study will establish how this will
help reduce such instances among others (Lehmann & Kim, 2006).
The significance of the study
Electronic health records systems come with a lot of advantages. Studying these
advantages might change the way some of the hospitals perceive about it. Also, the study will
show how the system will improve the quality of care and increase patient output on a daily

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 4
basis. According to one of the health practitioners, the maximum value of this system entirely
lies on how institutions are able to support its progress (Hydari, Telang & Marella, 2014). For
that reason, whatever will be found in this research will be very useful. First, it will significantly
aid in investments in the health information technology which are being made by the healthcare
team, states and the federal government (Tsai & Bond, 2008). Thus, this will be a big blow to the
government, in a way that they will have discovered new forms of treatment and making work
more comfortable (Kern et al., 2012). To the health institutions, there will be a reduced work and
made work easier issue while the economic status of the country will greatly improve. The
following are few of the issue that will be solved upon completion of the study.
1. Safety concerns are unique to the electronic health record systems.
Machine failure whether it is naturally made or human-made is entirely inevitable. Upon
using these systems, it is so obvious that at one point they may fail. This can arise when multiple
systems have been deployed to a larger geographic area (Lehmann & Kim, 2006). The
consequences have also become increasing despite scientists sorting ways in which they can
correct the issues. This has led to hospitals not being able to justify the use of such systems. For
instance, take an example of a situation that happened in Rhode islands. This was in April 2010
when one third of hospitals around Rhode were forced to postpone surgeries and divert life
threatening issues to hospitals that were not affected (Carli-Ghabarou et al., 2013). This was as a
result of an antivirus update which meant that the systems had multiple and endless restarts
which also caused a loss of network functionality. This really reduced the institution's activities
and even made patients lose their trust in such institutions (Xu, 2016).
Also, miscommunication between the components of an EHR system can lead to
compromised safety. For instance, data tables could have a mismatch in the data fields. This, in

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 5
turn, may affect the orders by introducing changes which are in advent and cannot be detected by
machines. Therefore, through the study, one can tell such problems and avoid them from
happening in future (Kern et al., 2012).
2. Mitigation of safety issue that arises from system failures.
One major concern with regard to the widespread use of this systems is that certain harms
can be reduced when they are properly used. For example, transfer of information can be
facilitated by using ERHs which standardize how information is passed between different
providers (Longhurst et al., 2010). This helps close the errors in communication which may
result when there are negative feedbacks. Another thing is about how systems embedded to the
ERHs are prone to human error thus have a cognitive constraint. Periodically, decisions must be
evaluated particularly those related to the clinical decision support (Krenn & Schlossman, 2017).
Lastly, even though there is an intensification in the safety which is associated with
incorporating free text, radiographic images, dictated reports among other tests dealing with the
ERHs, most institutions are yet to code critical data needed for maximization of safety. This
prevents users from getting feedback. Thus, to ensure full maximization of the system, the study
will detail on how to realize the full benefits of having a secure network (Carli-Ghabarou et al.,
2013).
3. Monitoring and improving patient safety by using the system.
Many national initiatives have always had a goal of improving the patient safety and
facilitating the prevention of safety measures. In the near future, electronic data might be used
and can be used to manage, detect and learn from probable safety (Kenneally & Dittrich, 2012).
The stakeholders involved here include the joint commission, the agency for healthcare research
and quality and the partnership for patients which was not formed long ago. Current ways of

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 6
measuring safety rely mostly on incident reports which can only detect a very small portion of
events (Hydari, Telang & Marella, 2014). The newly formularized systems have a program
which easily recognizes undermined and overlooked errors. In addition, the electronic system
could pay attention to improving the infrastructure that exists in reporting to patient safety
organizations (Campbell & Ryan, 2012). This can be done by generating data which describes
specific safety events. Thus, detection and reporting would be more efficient and help reduce the
amount of resources spent towards investigating and acting upon (Tsai & Bond, 2008).
Contribution to the field and beneficiaries.
Professionally, doctors will benefit more. Since this is their field of work, they will find
everything easier. Also, targets will get reached in a way that there will be a maximum number
of patients being attended to (Krenn & Schlossman, 2017). Largely, the entire team from low,
middle to high profiled workers will benefit. Through the study, there will be an increased
medical knowledge both for the researcher and the entire healthcare fraternity. Generally, the
study is meant to benefit the whole nation. The people will be aware of the new systems hence it
will not be a problem in trying to explain what it entails (Xu, 2016). To the patients, they will
find service delivery improved, and there will also be an increased number of healthcare issue
solved due to the improvised systems. Also, it is through the study that one will be able to know
the flaws of previous systems and correct the mistakes making it a better one. Lastly, for the
team, their work will be easier particularly in areas of keeping records (Krenn & Schlossman,
2017).
Identifying key variables.
To respond to the research questions given earlier, the most appropriate methods to instill
would be by qualitative analysis. Also, using questionnaires would be used in this case. Before

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 7
that, one should ensure that they are aware of the variables that they are going to use. In this
case, the study is about improving the medical sector and the way patients are treated. For that
case, variables here are the patients, the electronic system, and the entire fraternity of the health
care. First, by using qualitative research, it will be easy to know how medical staff relates to the
patients. This will be helpful as to know how fast or slow the practitioners will be keying
information regarding their patients (Carli-Ghabarou et al., 2013). For this case, a non-random
sample will be carried. To be precise, purposive sample procedures would be appropriate. This
will help in engaging the patients into knowing how they relate to their doctors and other staff
members. The results gathered will be necessary for knowing how well the medical staff will be
ready and willing to educate their patients and make them calm about the new systems (Jha &
Classen, 2011).
Secondly, practitioners will be given questionnaires. The questions will be to determine
how they best view the new system (Harrington, Kennerly & Johnson, 2011). Also, they will
indicate their previous relationship with the other system they had and how well they will see
this new system help them. This information will help in knowing the cons and the pros of the
electronic systems. After that, it will be then given the go-ahead on whether to be used or to be
ignored.
Upon the respondents’ agreement to take part in the study, the researcher begins with the
patients. This comes after they have selected few of the patients who will participate. However,
one disadvantage is that one will never find the same patients in a hospital each time they are
there (Jha & Classen, 2011). This means that patients will be selected on the day when the
research will take place. A good relationship needs to be built between the researcher and the
patients so that they can give them reliable information (Martín, Larrea & Jiménez, 2009).

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 8
Comparison of stories then takes place and depending on the level of similarity; results are
drawn as either positive or negative. When through with the first stage, the researcher
administers the questionnaires to the medical staff. This also will be gauged with the similarity in
answers since the questions are purely the same. Judgment is made and results tabulated.
Critical thinking skills.
Previously, the study has been conducted to establish how well these systems can be
integrated and used in the current society. Results have always been positive despite some few
hitches which have always been improved (Ridelberg, Roback & Nilsen, 2017). Also, lack of
enough funds has always made it impossible for the implementation of the program. For
instance, look at the research done in 2008 by some scientist from the health information
technology evaluation collaborative. They came up with data of about 500pyhsicians from 5
different institutions and nearly 75000 patients. The idea of having different health plans was a
great strengthener in that particular research (Phansalkar et al., 2013). According to them, about
56 percent of the doctors who used the electronic system provided excellent care that those who
used paper records. Also, the investigation showed how well the EHRs led to a better patient care
system. However, the research was not complete as they were not able to establish the negative
sides of using the system. Despite that, the likes of Commonwealth and New York state
department of health were able to approve the results (Amiri, Rahimi & Khalkhali, 2018).
Towards empowering this system, we can see that the Obama passed the law and the
system has been examining the issue for quite a long time. Healthcare has improved across the
entire united states. However, the other manual system of keeping records has not been neglected
since it is inevitable for such circumstances to happen. However, it is still not clear how long it

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 9
will take for the systems to get renovated and new systems to be integrated. Over time, research
of the same is expected to take place to solve issues before it is late (Phansalkar et al., 2012).

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 10
References
Amiri, P., Rahimi, B., & Khalkhali, H. (2018). Determinant of successful implementation of
Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) system from physicians’ perspective:
Feasibility study prior to implementation. Electronic Physician, 10(1), 6201-6207.
http://dx.doi.org/10.19082/6201
Campbell, P., & Ryan, J. (2012). Diuretic Dosing in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure:
Lessons from DOSE. Current Heart Failure Reports, 9(3), 260-265.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11897-012-0094-8
Carli-Ghabarou, D., Seidling, H., & Lovis, C. (2013). A survey-based inventory of clinical
decision support systems in computerized provider order entry in Swiss hospitals.
Swiss Medical Weekly. http://dx.doi.org/10.4414/smw.2013.13894
Harrington, L., Kennerly, D., & Johnson, C. (2011). Safety Issues Related to the Electronic
Medical Record (EMR): Synthesis of the Literature from the Last Decade, 2000-
2009. Journal of Healthcare Management, 56(1), 31-44.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00115514-201101000-00006
Hydari, M., Telang, R., & Marella, W. (2014). Saving Patient Ryan Can Advanced Electronic
Medical Records Make Patient Care Safer? SSRN Electronic Journal.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2503702
Jha, A., & Classen, D. (2011). Getting Moving on Patient Safety — Harnessing Electronic Data
for Safer Care. New England Journal of Medicine, 365(19), 1756-1758.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/nejmp1109398

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 11
Kenneally, E., & Dittrich, D. (2012). The Menlo Report: Ethical Principles Guiding Information
and Communication Technology Research. SSRN Electronic Journal.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2445102
Kern, L., Barrón, Y., Dhopeshwarkar, R., Edwards, A., & Kaushal, R. (2012). Electronic Health
Records and Ambulatory Quality of Care. Journal of General Internal Medicine,
28(4), 496-503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2237-8
Krenn, L., & Schlossman, D. (2017). Have Electronic Health Records Improved the Quality of
Patient Care? PM&R, 9(5), S41-S50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.04.001
Lehmann, C., & Kim, G. (2006). Computerized Provider Order Entry and Patient Safety.
Pediatric Clinics of North America, 53(6), 1169-1184.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pcl.2006.09.006
Longhurst, C., Parast, L., & Sandborg, (2010). Decrease in Hospital-wide Mortality Rate After
Implementation of a Commercially Sold Computerized Physician Order Entry
System. PEDIATRICS, 126(1), 14-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-3271
Martín, C., Larrea, M., & Jiménez, E. (2009). Implementing the Omega failure detector in the
crash-recovery failure model. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 75(3),
178-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2008.10.002
Phansalkar, S., Desai, A., Bell, D., Yoshida, E., Doole, J., & Czochanski, M. et al. (2012). High-
priority drug-drug interactions for use in electronic health records. Journal of The
American Medical Informatics Association, 19(5), 735-743.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000612

IMPROVING PATIENT CARE 12
Phansalkar, S., Desai, A., Choksi, A., Yoshida, E., Doole, J., & Czochanski, M. et al. (2013).
Criteria for assessing high-priority drug-drug interactions for clinical decision
support in electronic health records. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision
Making, 13(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-13-65
Qiao, Y., Asan, O., & Montague, E. (2015). Factors associated with patient trust in electronic
health records used in primary care settings. Health Policy and Technology, 4(4),
357-363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2015.08.001
Ridelberg, M., Roback, K., & Nilsen, P. (2017). How Can Safer Care Be Achieved? Patient
Safety Officers’ Perceptions of Factors Influencing Patient Safety in Sweden.
Journal of Patient Safety, 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/pts.0000000000000262
Tsai, J., & Bond, G. (2008). A comparison of electronic records to paper records in mental health
centers. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 20(2), 136-143.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm064
Xu, R. (2016). Electronic Health Records: Patient Care Quality. Revue Interdisciplinaire des
Sciences De La Santé - Interdisciplinary Journal of Health Sciences, 5(1), 27.
http://dx.doi.org/10.18192/riss-ijhs.v5i1.1442