EMR, commonly known as electronic medical record, has opened a new chapter of service quality in the field of healthcare. It has brought opportunities for the medical staff to make their work life as effortless as possible by streamlining clinical procedures. In recent past when EMR was introduced it took huge amount of resources in the form of human capital, postal services and stationery item to process just one file. EMR software has proved to be a environment friendly healthcare system by removing the need for bulky paper work, piles of record keeping and hand written applications and prescriptions, substituting it with the sustainable and atmosphere pro electronic medical record system.
During 1990s, particularly in 1996 when the HIPAA Act came into effect, there was very low electronic medical record usage by physicians. Some of the adoption issues reported then with EMR systems were fears of poor security of sensitive information and the complexity involved in the personal information held. The resulting solution was industry led, as CCHIT was formed to only support the electronic health system but also certify it so that clinics and hospitals can widely adapt to the environment friendly health care option.
EMR Software - An Eco Friendly Alternative?
Much has been said about eco friendly or environmental friendly business alternatives and many business organizations are spending fortunes making their products friendly to the environment. This is the same for electronic medical record system companies. Many larger firms, such as CureMD, NextGen, CERNER, and Epic Care are developing electronic medical records system with paper-free services like electronic medical billing, business process outsourcing, and online registration of patients, online data compilation and electronic entry by physicians. Together with these solutions a popular recent innovation of EMR system is the use of web-accessible patient records.
With the advent of this important module, the healthcare facility becomes accessible nearly anywhere. The product of EMR system aims to deliver well-organized data and information directly to patients so they remain fully informed of their conditions throughout their recovery.
Meanwhile, the primary objective EMR system adoption is to make the work surroundings at clinics and hospitals paper free and efficient while including the minimum probability of errors. This environmental friendly health care system is not only sustainable but will also result in far fewer laboratory appointments for reports, thus easing patient's physical and mental condition.
The Green Merits Of An Electronic Medical Record System
Because a leading-edge electronic medical record system has high processing capability, with applications processed with a single click, it has provided huge efficiency bonuses to practices. With its innumerable benefits it intends to trim down errors and filing time.
These days, resources are limited and we all are trying to find the most environmental friendly way of doing business. EMR systems contribute towards environment protection by converting paper records into software databases. The energy saved in just one electronic medical record is truly surprising, and is a great step for an industry that definitely has no shortage of waste.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
The Japanese Health Care System
Japan, a nation with a long life expectancy, a rapidly aging population and a reputation as being expensive, surprising has one of the lowest per capita health care costs among the developed nations. Here is a basic look at the system, how it controls costs and some of its positive and negative points.
Residents of Japan are obliged to join one of two types of health insurance systems. One type is a social insurance plan which is normally for corporate employees. The other is national health insurance, which is for the self-employed, students and others not covered under a social insurance plan.
When someone goes to a hospital in Japan, insurance will usually cover 70%-80% of the costs upfront with the patient paying the difference. For more expensive treatments, the patient can receive a reimbursement for costs incurred.
By law, the insurance plans cannot deny a legitimate claim or refuse anyone regardless of preexisting conditions. Also, medical care is not rationed by age or for any other reason. Most hospitals are privately owned. However, the rates they can charge for most services and drugs are set by Japanese Health Ministry every couple of years.
People are free to choose whichever hospital they like. In spite of the fact Japanese people receive more medical care and spend more time in hospitals, Japan spends less on health care, and health insurance costs are much lower.
Negative points of the Japanese system
Doctors on average see more patients and thus spend less time with each individual patient than in the US. Hospital conditions are often not as nice as those found in the US. For example, unless paying for a private room, most patients stay in shared rooms with the patients separated by curtains. Most hospitals do not take reservations. Patients simply go to the hospital and wait their turn.
Drugs are often over prescribed. One reason for this is that since doctors spend less time with each patient, the sometimes simply prescribe drugs for initial visits instead of more thoroughly diagnosing the problem. The other reason is that hospitals sometimes can make money off the prescriptions.
Since going to the hospital is relatively cheap, people abuse the system and seek medical treatment when it is not really needed. Many hospitals are losing money since prices are often set too low. Also, there is underinvestment in some areas and the system is laden in paperwork and regulation.
While premiums are still much lower than the US, they are rising and an increasing number of people cannot afford them. However, this is often offset by programs that provide medical care for the children and the elderly. Overall, while the Japanese health care system does a good job at providing nearly universal coverage at an affordable price, it is not without it problems.
Residents of Japan are obliged to join one of two types of health insurance systems. One type is a social insurance plan which is normally for corporate employees. The other is national health insurance, which is for the self-employed, students and others not covered under a social insurance plan.
When someone goes to a hospital in Japan, insurance will usually cover 70%-80% of the costs upfront with the patient paying the difference. For more expensive treatments, the patient can receive a reimbursement for costs incurred.
By law, the insurance plans cannot deny a legitimate claim or refuse anyone regardless of preexisting conditions. Also, medical care is not rationed by age or for any other reason. Most hospitals are privately owned. However, the rates they can charge for most services and drugs are set by Japanese Health Ministry every couple of years.
People are free to choose whichever hospital they like. In spite of the fact Japanese people receive more medical care and spend more time in hospitals, Japan spends less on health care, and health insurance costs are much lower.
Negative points of the Japanese system
Doctors on average see more patients and thus spend less time with each individual patient than in the US. Hospital conditions are often not as nice as those found in the US. For example, unless paying for a private room, most patients stay in shared rooms with the patients separated by curtains. Most hospitals do not take reservations. Patients simply go to the hospital and wait their turn.
Drugs are often over prescribed. One reason for this is that since doctors spend less time with each patient, the sometimes simply prescribe drugs for initial visits instead of more thoroughly diagnosing the problem. The other reason is that hospitals sometimes can make money off the prescriptions.
Since going to the hospital is relatively cheap, people abuse the system and seek medical treatment when it is not really needed. Many hospitals are losing money since prices are often set too low. Also, there is underinvestment in some areas and the system is laden in paperwork and regulation.
While premiums are still much lower than the US, they are rising and an increasing number of people cannot afford them. However, this is often offset by programs that provide medical care for the children and the elderly. Overall, while the Japanese health care system does a good job at providing nearly universal coverage at an affordable price, it is not without it problems.
Problems with Our Health Care System
Given the enormous amount of money that is spent on our health care system and the research that has gone into the various diseases we would be excused if we think that there should be able to trust our health care system to deliver quality health care. Sadly, our Western health care system falls well short of what is desired. Instead of healing and health it largely delivers suffering and further disease. Mendelssohn as far back as 1979 (and he wasn't the first to suggest it) considers that the public has been 'conned' about the benefits delivered by 'scientific medicine'. There is a great deal of myth that surrounds our current system.
A part of the myth is that medical practice has produced an overall increase in health in the past one hundred years. However, historical analysis has found that general improvements in social and environmental conditions provide a more adequate explanation of the changes than the rise of 'scientific medicine'. Factors such as the improvement in diet and nutrition, sanitation and improved general living conditions have made the greatest difference.
Hospitals are deadly. Mistakes/errors, accidents, infections, medical drug disasters, diagnostic equipment including; X-rays, ultrasounds and mammograms make hospitals very dangerous. Hard technology has taken over the central role in modern medicine as it is considered effective and efficient. This has however been questioned. It is considered uneconomic and it also causes an unnecessary amount of pain and suffering. Accidents in hospitals now occur more frequently than in any other industry except mining and high rise construction. In addition to this are the medical doctor caused diseases. They are so common that they have their own name - iatrogenesis. Again the general public is unaware of how common this disease is. All told, iatrogenesis accounts for 784,000 deaths each year in the United States - more American deaths than all the wars of the 20th century combined. 98,000 deaths a year are caused by medical errors alone, and surgical errors account for another 32,000 deaths. These figures include only deaths. Officials admit that medical errors are reported in official data only 5 percent of the time, so the problem is much greater - exactly how much greater, no one really knows.
Research carried out in Australia showed that the equivalent of a jumbo jet load of people died unnecessarily died each week in Australia because of medical interventions - this information was contained in an official Health Department report. It was substantially hushed up - because of the potential impact of the information on the general public! We talk about and work to reduce road accidents and we 'ground' airplanes that are shown to have faults - but the general public is generally unaware of the risks that they take when they come under the care of the medical health care system.
Apart from accidents and medical mistakes adverse drug reactions and infections account for many of the incidences of iatrogenesis. Adverse drug reactions are very common. Some of these reactions can be minor but they can also be deadly. There are five main groups into which these adverse reactions can be placed. Those that:
* adversely affect the blood cells,
* cause toxicity in the liver,
* damage the kidneys,
* affect the skin, and
* affect the unborn baby.
The hazardous side effects listed here do not include allergic reactions or medication errors, but rather the effects of the drugs themselves. Out of the 2.2 million cases of serious adverse reactions to drugs each year, authorities have listed four types of drugs as being the worst offenders for adverse reactions. These are antibiotics (17%), cardiovascular drugs (17%), chemotherapy drugs (15%), analgesics/anti-inflammatory drugs (15%). 198 drugs were approved by the FDA from1976 through 1985 and over 50 percent had serious post-approval reactions. Many adverse reactions were discovered during clinical trials and were covered up by pharmaceutical manufacturers in order to get FDA approval. The FDA is also far from blame free when it comes to giving approval for drugs that have serious reactions. The whole drug approval process has many problems and cannot be relied upon to protect the public from dangerous drugs.
Antibiotics are no longer working on many extremely dangerous bacteria or they only work in doses that that cause serious side effects. The development of these antibiotic resistant 'superbugs' is in the order of a crisis. In the years following the introduction of antibiotics they were (and still are) used for the treatment of common colds and flu and other complaints. Antibiotics, such as tetracycline were used (and still are) over long periods of time for the treatment of acne. Ampicillin and bactrim were used for the wrong reasons and there has been a reliance on antibiotics to treat recurrent bladder infections, chronic ear infections, chronic sinusitis, chronic bronchitis and non-bacterial sore throats. The UK office of health Economics in 1997 (cited in Chaitow) reported the following statistics:
· 5,000 people are being killed every year (in UK hospitals alone) by infections that they caught in hospital.
· A further 15,000 deaths are being contributed to by the infections that they caught in hospital.
· One in 16 patients who goes to hospital for anything will develop a 'hospital acquired infection'.
· Many of the infections acquired involve the difficult to treat 'superbugs'.
· USA figures published more than a decade ago show that 1 in 10 patients develops an infection that they caught in hospital - this involves around 2.5 million people every year.
· Every year 20,000 of these people die from their infections and the deaths of a further 60,000 are contributed to by the hospital acquired infection - a large number of these involve antibiotic resistant 'superbugs'.
The current approach of our health care system is ineffective and can potentially cause more harm and damage than the original condition. Although undoubtedly many lives have been saved by timely medical intervention much medical intervention is unnecessary and alternatives, which don't cause the same devastation, are available. Everyone needs to consider the way they interact with the medical system. Try to avoid the health care system if you can and certainly question your medical practitioner very carefully about any intervention they wish to make. Many will not like this questioning and just want to be seen as the 'all knowing, all wise doctor' - but this they are not! Do not be conned and do not buy into myths about the medical profession and health care.
Having said this it is important that if you are currently taking medication that you don't suddenly stop. Seek information, discover alternatives and discuss changing you approach to health care with a health professional. If your current medical practitioner is uninformed about alternatives (as many are) or unwilling to discuss these with you (as many are) then you may need to seek a different health professional who is prepared to help you improve your health rather than just use medical drug prescriptions or surgery!
A part of the myth is that medical practice has produced an overall increase in health in the past one hundred years. However, historical analysis has found that general improvements in social and environmental conditions provide a more adequate explanation of the changes than the rise of 'scientific medicine'. Factors such as the improvement in diet and nutrition, sanitation and improved general living conditions have made the greatest difference.
Hospitals are deadly. Mistakes/errors, accidents, infections, medical drug disasters, diagnostic equipment including; X-rays, ultrasounds and mammograms make hospitals very dangerous. Hard technology has taken over the central role in modern medicine as it is considered effective and efficient. This has however been questioned. It is considered uneconomic and it also causes an unnecessary amount of pain and suffering. Accidents in hospitals now occur more frequently than in any other industry except mining and high rise construction. In addition to this are the medical doctor caused diseases. They are so common that they have their own name - iatrogenesis. Again the general public is unaware of how common this disease is. All told, iatrogenesis accounts for 784,000 deaths each year in the United States - more American deaths than all the wars of the 20th century combined. 98,000 deaths a year are caused by medical errors alone, and surgical errors account for another 32,000 deaths. These figures include only deaths. Officials admit that medical errors are reported in official data only 5 percent of the time, so the problem is much greater - exactly how much greater, no one really knows.
Research carried out in Australia showed that the equivalent of a jumbo jet load of people died unnecessarily died each week in Australia because of medical interventions - this information was contained in an official Health Department report. It was substantially hushed up - because of the potential impact of the information on the general public! We talk about and work to reduce road accidents and we 'ground' airplanes that are shown to have faults - but the general public is generally unaware of the risks that they take when they come under the care of the medical health care system.
Apart from accidents and medical mistakes adverse drug reactions and infections account for many of the incidences of iatrogenesis. Adverse drug reactions are very common. Some of these reactions can be minor but they can also be deadly. There are five main groups into which these adverse reactions can be placed. Those that:
* adversely affect the blood cells,
* cause toxicity in the liver,
* damage the kidneys,
* affect the skin, and
* affect the unborn baby.
The hazardous side effects listed here do not include allergic reactions or medication errors, but rather the effects of the drugs themselves. Out of the 2.2 million cases of serious adverse reactions to drugs each year, authorities have listed four types of drugs as being the worst offenders for adverse reactions. These are antibiotics (17%), cardiovascular drugs (17%), chemotherapy drugs (15%), analgesics/anti-inflammatory drugs (15%). 198 drugs were approved by the FDA from1976 through 1985 and over 50 percent had serious post-approval reactions. Many adverse reactions were discovered during clinical trials and were covered up by pharmaceutical manufacturers in order to get FDA approval. The FDA is also far from blame free when it comes to giving approval for drugs that have serious reactions. The whole drug approval process has many problems and cannot be relied upon to protect the public from dangerous drugs.
Antibiotics are no longer working on many extremely dangerous bacteria or they only work in doses that that cause serious side effects. The development of these antibiotic resistant 'superbugs' is in the order of a crisis. In the years following the introduction of antibiotics they were (and still are) used for the treatment of common colds and flu and other complaints. Antibiotics, such as tetracycline were used (and still are) over long periods of time for the treatment of acne. Ampicillin and bactrim were used for the wrong reasons and there has been a reliance on antibiotics to treat recurrent bladder infections, chronic ear infections, chronic sinusitis, chronic bronchitis and non-bacterial sore throats. The UK office of health Economics in 1997 (cited in Chaitow) reported the following statistics:
· 5,000 people are being killed every year (in UK hospitals alone) by infections that they caught in hospital.
· A further 15,000 deaths are being contributed to by the infections that they caught in hospital.
· One in 16 patients who goes to hospital for anything will develop a 'hospital acquired infection'.
· Many of the infections acquired involve the difficult to treat 'superbugs'.
· USA figures published more than a decade ago show that 1 in 10 patients develops an infection that they caught in hospital - this involves around 2.5 million people every year.
· Every year 20,000 of these people die from their infections and the deaths of a further 60,000 are contributed to by the hospital acquired infection - a large number of these involve antibiotic resistant 'superbugs'.
The current approach of our health care system is ineffective and can potentially cause more harm and damage than the original condition. Although undoubtedly many lives have been saved by timely medical intervention much medical intervention is unnecessary and alternatives, which don't cause the same devastation, are available. Everyone needs to consider the way they interact with the medical system. Try to avoid the health care system if you can and certainly question your medical practitioner very carefully about any intervention they wish to make. Many will not like this questioning and just want to be seen as the 'all knowing, all wise doctor' - but this they are not! Do not be conned and do not buy into myths about the medical profession and health care.
Having said this it is important that if you are currently taking medication that you don't suddenly stop. Seek information, discover alternatives and discuss changing you approach to health care with a health professional. If your current medical practitioner is uninformed about alternatives (as many are) or unwilling to discuss these with you (as many are) then you may need to seek a different health professional who is prepared to help you improve your health rather than just use medical drug prescriptions or surgery!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)