10 things you hate about your EMR

Change is hard. And when that change involves new technology and a radical shift within the industry, it’s even easier to become frustrated. 

The great debate concerning electronic medical records continues to this day, and as more systems are implemented, the more issues providers and professionals have with them. That’s why we asked readers and experts alike to share with us some of their biggest gripes concerning EMRs.

Twitter and LinkedIn were buzzing with issues ranging from usability to an increase in paperwork. From legacy systems to the downright inoperable, we’re seeing EMRs have a long way to go before they’re considered preventative, practical, and patient-friendly. 

Check out the top 10 things you hate about your EMR: 

1. It doesn’t measure up to paper. Shahid Shah, software analyst and author of the blog Healthcare IT Guy, can’t stand when developers and other IT professionals “assume paper records and medical grade documents aren’t as important as structured data.” And according to Deborah Peel, MD, a practicing physician and national expert on medical privacy, EMR systems don’t allow patients to control who can see, use, or disclose sensitive health data. “Today’s EMRs were never build to comply with [patients’] constitutional and ethical rights to privacy,” she said. “This is very different from how paper medical record systems work: where doctors always asked for [patients’] consent before releasing [their] records to anyone.” And when some argue there are many things EMRs can do that paper records can’t, such as sharing information from doctor to doctor, Twitter user @sixuntilme thinks otherwise. “Every doctor has [an EMR], but none of those records talk to one another,” she tweeted. “We need an EMR cloud.”

2. It’s hard to use. Twitter user @LivingWellDoc believes there are many issues concerning an EMR’s usability. “[They] need way more bandwidth than expected,” she tweeted. “[They have] cumbersome interface…[and it’s] difficult to get to certain screens (for example, to make a personal favorite list of prescriptions, have to do so within a patient record).” Twitter user @gemlovesblue also agreed and tweeted, “I hate EHR and validating expense claims. Confusing as hell. I say this with the utmost conviction. #work.” Natalie Hodge, MD, author of the blog Healthergy.net and co-founder and CHO of Personal Medicine, offered a simple solution to making EMR systems easier to use. According to her, all EMR systems should be able to work on a Mac. “There is an inherent amount of costs in Windows-based products because you have to do a million things to make them run,” she said. “People say ‘Macs are so expensive,’ but when you compare the cost of them to hardware in Windows products, Macs are worth it.” Hodge continued by saying many doctors aren’t happy with EMRs, not because of the software, but because of the hardware. “They have multiple pervasive hardware issues that are problematic,” she said. 

3. It doesn’t provide the basics. LinkedIn user David McCartney, CFO at Center Street Community Health Center, has issues with certain systems and their inability to generate basic reports. According to him, the patient accounting module that his vendor is using is “something else.” “My rev cycle coordinator says it’s hard to post money to,” McCartney wrote in response to a question posed by the Healthcare Finance News group. “More importantly, we’re still getting a month-end rev report by the vendor running a database query—there doesn’t appear to be a standard report. And, there is no aged A/R report, either detail or summary.” McCartney explained how he can't graph by the age of the payer to see where problems are. In addition, he can’t estimate allowances for uncollectibles based on ageing. “We’re 13 months into this system and continue to be promised that they’re developing standard reports. I’ve been working in healthcare for 25 years and have never seen a system that couldn’t generate an aged receivable listing.”  Twitter user @aimeecarsonmb has similar issues with her system and the lack of information it provides. “I hate getting discharge summaries from an EMR,” she tweeted. “You get all the details but none of the real info.”

Continued on the next page.

Previous
1

Showing 10 Comments

Joshua Smith say: .NET is almost 10 years old

"10. It’s outdated. According to Hodge, software that’s written in any kind of language that’s more than four years old is an issue. "

What enterprise-level programming language out there is less than four years old?

HTML5 is NOT a programming language, it's for structure and presentation. There's an actual programming language behind it doing all the heavy work to supply the calculations and data for HTML5 to make pretty.

Daniel Matthews say: My opinion on the matter

Anyone who says that paper is better than electronic has no argument. You cannot start your argument by claiming that a paper process which is slower and more cumbersome than an automated computer process is better. Without EMRs/EHRs we have no argument. I admit the systems are not great when compared to systems in other industries, but then again Healthcare seems to have more complex processes than other industries. Maybe Healthcare has too much paper. Maybe we have to change our processes to accomodate a more cybernetic approach. Safety measures are there for patient information, more so than a paper one. You can present digital COT and NOPP forms to patients the same way you do with a paper and secure them better and retrieve them better. Advantages of a computer over paper, one storage, one managed approach, quick accumulation of data, and that means an improvement to the entire cycle of care.

dch say: Yup

Ditto.

If EHR technologies were ready for prime time, we'd have been lusting after them and stampeding to buy them. Steve Jobs, for better and for worse, understood that concept. People buy what they want.

HITECH is a tangible indictment of the market prematurity of EHR technologies. Politicians, bureacrats, academicians, administrators and EHR vendors decided to force docs to use this stuff, believing we'd just love it once it was force fed to us.

Unfortunately, such mandates don't magically improve quality.

Market competition does.

And, EHR vendors depend upon proprietary mechanisms to reduce effective competition. Specifically, once a doc buys an EHR system, he's stuck. If he doesn't like it, too bad. So sad. Costs too much to go buy a new system and migrate the old data to the new system.

A doc is better off just dumping the EHR to paper and moving on.

Shea PF say: EMRs will prevail over paper

Some of these statements are valid but keep in mind with paper there is no progression or room for improvement, it will never get better only worse but with EMRs, especially if they're web-based, there is so much more room for improvement, especially for an EMR.

anonMD say: Is Twitter a useful source?

Many of the comments contained in the article are valid, but how does one expect to use Twitter, with its 140 character message length limitation, to get an in depth feel for EHR problems?

On LinkedIn, in the HIMSS group, there is a 2 year old discussion, with well over 2000 entries (some long and detailed, some short and snide) responding to the question "Top ten reasons why EMR/EHR implementations are failing?"

The regulatory environment, planning, database design, interface design, installation, training, usability, customization, reporting, communications, translations, security, organizational support, vendor support and dozens of other topics have all been taken to task.

10-15% of the posts relate to "use my product - it will solve all problems." 75-80% of the posts deal with a relatively narrow perspective from a coder, or nurse, or administrator or physician. But 10-15% of the posts are from very knowledgeable people with long experience and a broad perspective who are able and willing to describe in detail the deep, dark problems that the requirements for EMR usage have brought to medicine.

There is an enormous degree of recognition in the IT world that EMR/EHRs are not equal to the task, and that's in spite of (or because of) the fact that no one can even state with certainty what the task is!

It's actually refreshing to see a HIMSS publication finally acknowledge that there are problems with EMRs. The go-go propaganda has become rather sickening. But is Twitter realy a useful way to expore the problem, or is it just another expedient choice in a multi-professional industrial disaster filled with expedient choices?

say: Twitter as a source

I think you raise a very interesting point, and one that we were excited to explore, which was using Twitter (and LinkedIn) as a way to gather thoughts from readers. Sure, the 140-character limit isn't ideal, but what better way for those frustrated with their EMR to articulate it using a strict limit on words? I think it brought out some very interesting responses, and although people couldn't elaborate, they used strong vocabulary to make up for that, which truly showed their frustrations.

And from my perspective as a writer, I don't think there is a more efficient way to give our readers a voice than to go to Twitter and Linkedin. We have almost 10,000 followers on Twitter, and if you think about it, that's 10,000 people that could have voiced their opinion and have it shared with all our readers. It was important for us to showcase the things you (as in the readers) hate about your EMR, and social media is an excellent tool to connect with them. Not to mention, there are a million conversations swirling around Twitter concerning health IT. You just have to know where to look!

RM say: Half full versus half empty

Ironically this is a PERFECT VENDOR SELECTION CHECKLIST! An awesome tool for practices to use and ask these exact questions of the vendors they are contemplating. In addition, practices should also make sure someone is driving the change and adoption. Physicians are smart people and would never buy a car without asking others or test driving first. There is no way a practice would make this kind of investment without doing plenty of homework first. BTW, #2 ‘It is hard to use’? You didn’t know how to use your iPhone when you first got it!

say: True!

Thank you! I could see how this could be a good checklist.

In regard to our number 2 point, I think it has more to do with usability after implementation, so in other words, after the training stages and maybe even a few months down the road. Many people we talked to find it cumbersome, and it takes numerous steps to complete a task. The iPhone is a good example because it's simple to use and easy to learn quickly. Some EMRs, especially legacy systems, require multiple "click throughs" just to get to one thing. An excellent example of additional issues that prove EMRs can be "hard to use" are all of our Twitter responses, which we included throughout the article.

Arjen Westerink say: Misconceptions of EHR

I do understand the title of this article, however, do believe that there are solutions available that can alleviate all of these ten hated things about EHRs. It is very important to go into the EHR selection process as educated as possible in order to select a system that will minimize these all too common issues. I have authored a blog with what I believe to be some valuable info on many of the challenges of EHRs and how to overcome them http://www.vitalblog.com

Kelly Mehler say: RE:

Thank you for your comment. I agree that in order for EMRs to be successful, everyone needs to be on board when it comes to the implementation and training. Maybe that's where organizations can improve. Thanks for including your blog post on the topic. -Kelly