Proposed Recommendations for Electronic Medical Records

Since their introduction, Electronic medical records (EMRs) have been perceived to possess the potential to advance the general health of the society. However, the major setbacks with the utilization of EMRs are the costs and challenges associated with the implementation of the systems. According to Hayes (2015), the cost of implementing an EMR system is quite high and could cost about $163, 765 for a single physician. Hayes (2015) research highlights that by 2015, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services had spent over $30 billion funding the implementation and utilization of EMR systems in about 468,000 care providers. Although the implementation and maintenance of EMR systems are high, there are several benefits associated with such systems. For instance, they result in minimal medical errors, improved patient care management, reduced costs, and increased productivity (Fottler, Khatri, and Savage, 2010). Proposed Recommendations for Electronic Medical Records

For the past ten years, the Wall County Health Department has been using the EMR system offered and maintained by the States Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Wall County Health Department has been paying a nominal fee for using the DHHS EMR system. However, following a severe budget cut, DHHS has signaled that it will terminate the maintenance of the EMR system within the next 120 days. After the scheduled termination, the users will manage to access the EMR system for only 12 months. In light of this, the main challenge facing the Wall County Health Department is on whether to install and maintain its EMR system or go back to the conventional medical records storage. For this reason, this proposal aims to offers a recommendation for the installation of an EMR system by the care facility.

The goal of any healthcare facility is to provide improved care to the patients sustainably. EMRs were implemented to increase the quality of healthcare delivery and patients outcomes. Since the introduction of EMRs, many healthcare facilities across the US have shown their interest in their adoption and use (Suresh and Stanton, 2016). For the past ten years, Wall County Health Department has entirely relied on EMR system to create and store medical records. Moreover, the care facility has depended on the system to generate pharmacy utilization, immunization, and treatment reports. For these reasons, Wall County Health Department should install, implement, and maintain its EMR system following the termination of the EMR system provided and maintained by DHHS to align with its mission. Although implementation of EMR is expensive, its long-term benefits are worth the upfront costs incurred. Such benefits include effective cure option at low costs, health expenditure reduction at the national level, provision of effective primary health care measures, and predictive medicine. Ideally, the combination of this benefits results in a healthier society. It is worth realizing that these benefits cannot be realized without the patient, the federal governments, and providers sustaining substantial initial costs for both implementation and maintenance (Hayes (2015).

The main reason why the care facility has not implemented and maintained its EMR system is that of cost-saving purposes. Notably, apart from the nominal fee, it pays for the EMR system provided by DHHS, the care facility major spending are on operation overheads, and care providers’ salaries in its four locations where it offers care services in the County. The healthcare facility receives most of its revenue from the money it collects from providing direct behavioral and physical health services to patients. Other funding is from the County general fund and grant programs. According to Hayes (2015), the cost of implementing and maintaining an EMR system is approximately $65,000 after factoring in federal subsidies.

Although this is still a considerable cost, the facility can manage to sustain it given that most of the care providers who require an EMR system are those involved in physical intervention care delivery with the facility locations. Moreover, the policymakers at the federal level are responsible for providing subsidies to a facility of Wall County Health Department nature, which implies that upfront costs incurred can equally be minimized (Joshi, 2017). The rationality for implementing the EMR system is equally supported by the facility’s desire to join the network of Medicaid Management Care and Medicare Advantage Insurer. Although the Insurer offers the highest rates, it tends to reduce them when facilities fail to improve their population health outcomes. Ideally, implementing an EMR system would result in sustained improved healthcare outcomes

References

Fottler, M. D., Khatri, N., & Savage, G. T. (2010). Strategic human resource management in health care. Bingley: Emerald.

Hayes, T. (2015). Are Electronic Medical Records Worth the Costs of Implementation? Retrieved 11 January 2018, from https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/are-electronic-medical-records-worth-the-costs-of-implementation/

Joshi, A. (2017). POPULATION HEALTH INFORMATICS: Driving evidence-based solutions into practice. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Suresh, S. & Stanton, B. (2016). Quality of care and information technology. Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania: Elsevier