A critique of the article The State of the Electronic Health Record in 2005

Running Head: A critique of the article The State of the Electronic Health Record in 2005

Acritique of the article TheState of the Electronic Health Record in 2005

Acritique of the article TheState of the Electronic Health Record in 2005

Thearticle TheState of the Electronic Health Record in 2005 illustratesthe state of the electronic health information systems in the UnitedStates in the year 2005. Some of the states in the United States suchas Mid-Carolina had embraced the use of electronic systems in thedelivery of healthcare (Weber,2005).States which had incorporated electronic systems in healthcare werebenefitting from it (Sinha, 2012). Most of the other states wereattracted by the success of those using technology in health care asindicated by a study where forty percent of those who had notincorporated technology in healthcare systems promised to do sowithin two years. From the study, health institutions that had a highnumber of physicians showed greater interest in shifting towards theuse of electronic systems in health care delivery compared to thoseinstitutions that had fewer numbers of physicians. This, therefore,indicates that the number of physicians contained in the facilityaffects the need for the move towards electronic systems (Weber,2005).Most physicians have however developed fears of cost and sheer terrorthat may accompany the use of electronic health records. The doctorsfear to make mistakes and, therefore, avoid taking action.

Thearticle speaks of the incorporation of electronic systems in thehealthcare sector of the United States. From a critical perspective,the article justifies the importance electronic systems in healthcarethrough various facts such as the simplification of work infacilities where physicians are many (David, 2005). The author alsorightly points out that there exist some faults, as experienced bythe doctors, in the incorporation of electronic systems inhealthcare. Some of the faults mentioned are the costs of suchsystems and sheer terror associated with them. The costs ofincorporating electronic systems stand at about ten to fifteenthousand dollars per physician which is substantially high assuggested by David (2005). However, the author fails to indicate inthe paper the significant contributions towards the establishment ofelectronic systems and the government’s contribution to ensuringthat electronic systems are of benefit in service delivery to thepatients in the nation (Weber,2005).

References

P.K., Sinha. (2012). Standard for Healthcare Concepts. ElectronicHealth Record Standards, Coding Systems, Frameworks, andInfrastructures,23-32. Retrieved March 2, 2016.

W.O., David. (2005). TheState of the Electronic Health Record in 2005.- Free … Retrieved March 01, 2016, fromhttp://www.thefreelibrary.com/The state of the electronic healthrecord in 2005.-a0137354727

Weber,D. O. (2005). The state of the electronic health record in2005.Physicianexecutive,&nbsp31(4),6.