Marion K. Jenkins, PhD, FHIMSS

Even if medical practices were in fact to be determined to be “ahead” of hospitals in their adoption of EMRs/EHRs, that’s like saying you beat the slowest kid in the class in a foot race.

PHRs were and are an important and promising concept. And Google, being the undisputed king of web entities, certainly looked like it would be a player in this space.

Though it may be true that some disaster or electrical outage may thrust tech-savvy and tech-dependent physicians into unfamiliar and uncomfortable territory - that of practicing medicine “the old-fashioned way” - proper development and appropriate implementation of information technologies has the promise of benefiting millions of patients on a daily basis.

Like the unicorn, which is well-defined in terms of its features and attributes, EHRs don’t actually exist.

Cloud computing is being widely touted as a way to eliminate IT headaches, reduce cost, and increase performance. What are some of the drawbacks practices should consider?

Are electronic records really more risky than paper records? They certainly can be, if proper data and network security procedures aren’t designed and implemented.

There are huge technology issues around the ACO model, not the least of which is the digital divide that separates those providers and practices who have embraced technology and are on board with EHR systems, and those who are still sitting on the sidelines.

Despite stimulus funds, too many providers are apparently still sitting on the sidelines, and some are turning their backs entirely on ARRA/HITECH.

Consider that HIPAA security breaches are behavior-driven, not technology driven.

The HIPAA Security Rule indeed represents good business practices. With the new higher fines resulting from ARRA/HITECH in 2009, medical practices and other covered entities would be well-served to adhere to and adopt the sound IT principles it contains.

While many industries are wringing even more efficiencies out of their IT systems investments, many in healthcare circles are still quarreling over whether healthcare IT is even a good idea.

Every provider and practice administrator thinks his or her staff is above average, so they frequently take the recommended training intervals and cut them way down. But chances are even - 50/50, to be precise - that your staff is below average, and that it will actually take more , not less, time to become fully productive with a new EHR system.

Healthcare IT is in a state of flux and change, with constant improvement and upgrades. With established companies rolling out new versions of their systems, alongside new entrants who are bringing new systems to market, the features and horsepower of HIT systems has never been greater.

Laptops are great. They provide incredible computing horsepower in a small and portable package. However, sometimes in the hands of certain players in healthcare, they can become a HIPAA security risk.

We have - in healthcare - made the patient essentially a critical part of the process? In what other industry would we have the customer become a courier for his/her treatment or service?

Poor handwriting, whether it’s for a prescription or a treatment order or for written care instructions, is responsible for hundreds of thousands of patient deaths. Yet most physicians and their staffs insist that it’s just part of the way things are.

Ever get frustrated awaiting service and results from a mechanic? Now imagine how some of your patients must feel when healthcare uses a similar information delivery method.

Why do we accept in healthcare a level of efficiency and automation - or lack thereof - that would be wholly unacceptable anywhere else

I can think of no other industry – transportation, hospitality, retail, telecommunications, etc. - that would have anywhere near 20 TOTAL software providers/systems, let alone 20 “top” systems.

A look at how "Fiddler on the Roof" and the debate over the pros and cons of cost savings tied to healthcare IT have a lot more in common than you would think.