Comments on: Electronic Health Records, Redux http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/ any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced Sat, 30 Aug 2008 06:39:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Jamie L. http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/#comment-57025 Jamie L. Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:02:32 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/#comment-57025 Accessibility from different providers is definitely the most pressing requirement for EHR (and also the least fulfilled.) One thing that concerns me from a privacy perspective, though, is it seems that a lot of the pioneers in this area are doing it hand in hand with large employers instead of working exclusively with patients and providers (e.g. WebMD's partnership with WalMart). One exception that I know of is a company called Chart Biopsy, (www.chartbiopsy.com) they have an EMR system that's designed specifically to allow different offices to communicate. It was originally designed primarily for local free clinics that end up sharing a lot of patients. (I know about them both through volunteer work at these clinics and they asked me for feedback occasionally on the interface, however I don't work for them.) Anyhow, recently they've announced they're going to start offering office accounts to regular medical practices. Personally, I think a better solution than chart biospy's approach is to better standardize EHR exchange so that a multiplicity of EHR systems can coexist peacefully, with perhaps a government sponsored repository for records. If it gets left to the private sector, though, I'm much more comfortable with Chart Biopsy's approach than WebMD's. Accessibility from different providers is definitely the most pressing requirement for EHR (and also the least fulfilled.) One thing that concerns me from a privacy perspective, though, is it seems that a lot of the pioneers in this area are doing it hand in hand with large employers instead of working exclusively with patients and providers (e.g. WebMD’s partnership with WalMart). One exception that I know of is a company called Chart Biopsy, (www.chartbiopsy.com) they have an EMR system that’s designed specifically to allow different offices to communicate. It was originally designed primarily for local free clinics that end up sharing a lot of patients. (I know about them both through volunteer work at these clinics and they asked me for feedback occasionally on the interface, however I don’t work for them.) Anyhow, recently they’ve announced they’re going to start offering office accounts to regular medical practices.

Personally, I think a better solution than chart biospy’s approach is to better standardize EHR exchange so that a multiplicity of EHR systems can coexist peacefully, with perhaps a government sponsored repository for records. If it gets left to the private sector, though, I’m much more comfortable with Chart Biopsy’s approach than WebMD’s.

]]>