Are blockchain and AI the keys to unlocking interoperability in healthcare?
EHRs were intended to be a way to better track health data for hospitals, payers and physicians. Although they have good intentions, they often end up causing more problems than they solve.
Doctors from every specialty
Yet, it isn’t just the thinning of their ranks that is wearing physicians down; it’s also the fact that they spend two-thirds of their time doing paperwork rather than actually caring for patients. For every hour they spend with a patient, physicians have to spend two more completing paperwork and working on electronic health records, reviewing test results, logging information, writing medication orders and other tasks.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
To exacerbate matters, networks from different providers don’t communicate with one another, so one provider might not know what the previous provider has prescribed or whether the patient is adhering to the treatment. When patients need to visit a specialist or another provider from a different network, doctors are burdened with even more unnecessary paperwork.
These issues create roadblocks to better patient care-most physicians join medicine to help people, and if the current practice environment and data management systems interfere with that goal, it’s time to change them.
EHRs: The Good and the Bad
In the past, medical transcription used to be easier. A doctor dictated exam outcomes on the fly, and a transcriptionist typed it into the patient record immediately. This allowed doctors to focus on patients while still recording data.
Then,
TRENDING:
According to a
Also, EHRs can store massive amounts of data, which is a double-edged sword because though data is important, the structure of that data creates challenges. On one hand, it is too limiting. Doctors can enter information about a patient's medical history, medications and procedures-but only through constrained check boxes that don't capture nuances and complexities.
Internal server error