Recent transition to electronic medical records frustrates some health care professionals, but impresses others

Instead of paper based records, many health care professionals are now utilizing an electronic version of patients' medical information. The electronic medical record can include progress notes, history of medications, vital signs, immunizations, laboratory data, and radiology reports. Health care providers maintain these records over time.

The goal of employing electronic medical records is to have faster and more accurate diagnoses, and to ensure the best care possible.
Also, by allowing easy access to medical records, doctors can now easily collaborate with one another regarding a patient.

Health care professionals are strongly encouraged to join the millions of others who have taken their practices online. However, there have been many glitches with the new system. Many health care providers are becoming more frustrated, but others see the potential this new service provides.

Some health care professionals believe electronic health records make doctoring more complicated, others are fascinated by the benefits. 

Many doctors are unsatisfied with the new system because they "spend more time clicking boxes on computer screens and less face-to-face time with patients," reported the Chattanooga Times Free Press.  "[Health care professionals feel] uncomfortable bringing a computer into the patient room." Doctors are beginning to have mixed feelings about relying on technology in their practices.

Overall, having a doctor who is trying to vigorously finish a note on a computer and is not fully attentive to the patient can be a problem. Doctors may miss subtle signs from the patient, and the entire experience at the doctor's office could seem impersonal. Many doctors argue that entering in data can be very time consuming. If a doctor is slow at typing, and does not have a scribe, then using a computer may decrease efficiency.

Not to mention, electronic medical records come in many different shapes and sizes. Trying to collaborate with other doctors can become quite difficult if the software is incompatible. For example, a note that a doctor is trying to relay may not send because the system will have issues translating the information. No software system is perfect, especially the newer ones.

However, according to Raheleh Vafaei, a current medical student, finding information about a patient becomes easier than ever when using electronic medical records.

Vafaei believes that the electronic health system is more efficient and Eco-friendly than before. Overall, she is a fan of the new system. While some medical professionals believe the new electronic medical system is impractical and useless, many are using the system comfortably.

Electronic health records make collaboration with patients effortless

Patients have more control over their care. Many physicians have set up online portals where doctors and patients can communicate via text, email, and even video. According to a Cisco info graphic, 70% of patients are comfortable without seeing the doctor in person and using these remote methodologies. 

Patients can now access their doctor's visit online through a secure portal, and are able to track their health records as well. For example, doctor Sejal Mattu prescribes medication to her patients and uses an online portal to discuss and review the patients' visits. After receiving their lab results and collaborating with her patients through the online portal, she can "ping" them to make adjustments as needed.

Technology has made it easy to contact your doctor. Patients can now ask their doctor a simple question without having to go to the doctor's office and waiting endless hours for an answer. Doctors can review these questions at the end of the day, and respond on their own time. The graphic on the right indicates patient's preferences in regards to communicating with their doctor, according to data from Cisco. 

A closer look: Dr. Nidhi Thareja explains the relatively easy transition from a paper based system to an electronic one 

Dr. Nidhi Thareja, a cardiologist in Los Angeles, works for Kaiser Permanente. She completed medical school at Vanderbelt University and finished her residency at George Washington University. She uses electronic medical records on a daily basis, and is very familiar with the system. 

Dr. Thareja provided more insight into the transition, as she herself experienced it. The cardiologist revealed that Kaiser Permanente relies heavily on electronic medical records in both the inpatient and outpatient wards. Dr. Nidhi Thareja said that everything is done through electronic medical records from consult notes to procedures. 

As electronic medical records are becoming more common across the nation, it is essential to have sufficient training. Increasingly more physicians are now heavily relying on technology for medical records. Therefore, it is important to be able to use the system effectively to experience the benefits. In the following video, Dr. Nidhi Thareja shares her smooth experience:  

For Dr. Nidhi Thareja, the transition was easy because she was very familiar with coding and information technology, as she majored in computer science. However, she reveals that it has been a tough road for many individuals because they are not yet used to the system. It is crucial for health care providers to properly learn the system, as many are struggling.

According to Dr. Nidhi Thareja, health care professionals should go through proper training because it is worthwhile in the long run. Regional Extension Centers (RECs) are companies around the nation that provide help with electronic health records. They are able to help select, train, and implement a certain EMR software according to what is best suitable for a practice. Utilizing this method, for example, is one method to train health care professionals. It will allow more people to get used to the new system.

There are many potential benefits when it comes to using electronic medical records. Once everyone has gone through training, productivity and efficiency in the workplace can increase, leading to better patient care and a more enriching experience.

Before fully grasping all the benefits of the new electronic system, it is important to evaluate the old system to understand why the new system is necessary.

The old paper based system led to missing information and confusion

The old paper based system led to many diagnostic mistakes and missing information, which led to inadequate care. A Practice Fusion study shows that 20% of laboratory tests are re-ordered because previous results are lost. Earlier methods of filing physical papers led to difficulties in searching for information. Thus, many records were often misplaced or lost.

Doctors are known for their bad handwriting. Therefore, it is oftentimes difficult for their assistants or patients to analyze their notes. Doctors would usually fill out an illegible template, which could easily be destroyed or misplaced. Not to mention, tons of paper has a negative effect on the environment.

Using paper caused many complications in the medical field, the Practice Fusion study continued. Important information such as laboratory results, history and physical exams, radiology results, letters, and pathology results went missing. The graph to the left reveals exactly how much information went missing using a paper based system. With technology steadily improving, it is important to fix this disorganization.

Having organized records will lead to fewer mistakes and, hopefully, better patient care.

Electronic medical records hope to better patient care 

Using electronic medical records makes information about a patient readily available, which limits confusion and improves precision and accuracy when doctors attempt to make a diagnosis, according to the Advanced Systems Data Corporation. Alerts are built into the software system, which allows doctors to better monitor drug abuse, warming signs, and abnormal lab results. 

Having an electronic based system also permits doctors to send a prescription electronically to the patient's local pharmacy. This concept is known as e-prescribing. Patients no longer have to take their written prescription to the pharmacy because doctors correspond directly with the pharmacy. 

With this new technology in place, it will be easier to track results, and less information will go missing because everything will be electronic, said a blog from the Corporation. The ultimate goal of implementing electronic medical records is to improve health care in the United States.

Improving the system means having better collaboration between doctors and better security

 Federal regulations mean that electronic health records are here to stay. However, problems exist within the software that need to be addressed. Dr. Thareja elaborates on these issues and explains the limitations when transmitting data to other health care professionals

Collaboration between doctors is quintessential to health care. Patients may have several doctors and it is the doctors' responsibility to gain the patient's full story. According to Dr. Thareja, collaboration between doctors is something the system needs to work on, but there are limits to how much information health care professionals can communicate.

"It is very difficult to send data from your EMR to a different EMR," she said. "The biggest change is to make the EMR talk to each other" to provide better patient care.

Furthermore, having a secure network in place is essential for safety and security. Having personal information means that hackers can potentially obtain that information. This is what happened in UCLA, and 4.5 million patients were affected. Hackers stole personal information including social security numbers, medicare numbers, names, and addresses. It is crucial to have cyber security experts and a secure network where doctors are able to store patients' personal information. 

Electronic medical records are here to stay, and the future of health care will rely heavily on the practicality and implementation of electronic medical records. Given the aforementioned issues with this technology, this system should continue to improve over time. 

Individuals attribute more negative effects of Facebook to others than themselves in respect to employment, privacy, and personal relationships

When participants in a recent study were asked about personal relationships, employment opportunities, and privacy, they claimed fewer negative consequences in their own lives from Facebook, but agreed that negative impacts due to Facebook exist among others.

This concept, known as the third party effect, does exist. There was, however, one exception.

Individuals did not perceive Facebook to have a negative impact on their closest friends' personal relationships. This makes sense and can be explained by a simple fact. If a person believes his or her Facebook use does not impact their own personal life, then their closest friends should also not bear this adverse effect.

Overall, the findings in this experiment are consistent with previous theories, such as the social distance corollary, which is the belief that others are more susceptible to the negative impacts of media than themselves.

This study gathered information by employing surveys in Northeastern U.S. universities

Researchers administered 15-minute surveys across 20 classrooms with a total of 357 participants. Each subject was asked demographic information such as race, age, class standing, grade point average, how much time they spend on Facebook each day, degree of privacy settings, and number of Facebook friends.

Participants were then asked to estimate the negative effects of Facebook employment, personal relationships, and privacy in four different groups-- closest friends, younger people, people in their Facebook network, and Facebook users in general. Participants rated these responses based on a five-point scale, with 1 as having no negative effect to 5 as having the strongest negative effect.

Limitations to this study do exist. Looking to the pie chart on the right, it is important to note that the majority of the participants in this study were white, composing 91.6% of the survey population. Additionally, all participants were close in age, as they were all undergraduate students. This small sample is quite unrepresentative of the Facebook user population, as all age groups are on Facebook, as well as many other ethnicities. Future research should focus on these potential differences that may affect the results.

The third party effect does not predict strong Facebook regulations

Past research shows that the third party effect influences an individual's willingness to support media regulation in an attempt to protect others from the negative influences of media. As discussed above, the third party effect is the phenomenon when a person believes the negative influences of media does not impact them, but has the potential to harm others. This study gathered inconclusive results about this. The researchers attributed this difference to the fact that most people are likely to view Facebook as a "nonharmful" social media site.

Undergraduate students at the University of Maryland reveal the same results as those of this study 


In order to examine and apply these results to our own world, 60 undergraduate students at the University of Maryland partook in an online survey through Qualtrics. Demographic information, such as gender, as well as the frequency of Facebook use was measured. Participants were asked to answer each question honestly, and were informed that the survey would be anonymous.


A total of 6 questions were asked in this survey. The first three questions pertained to the general population of Facebook users-- "In general, Facebook can negatively impact personal relationships," "Facebook can ultimately impact and negatively affect employment," and "Lastly, Facebook can negatively impact a person's privacy." On a separate page, three questions related to personal experiences were asked--"Facebook has negatively impacted my personal relationships," "I am scared of what future employers will think of my Facebook page," and "I oftentimes feel unsafe that people have access to my personal information." Subjects were given a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree.

Results were surprisingly consistent with the aforementioned study. In general, a vast majority of people viewed negative effects of Facebook to affect others, but not themselves. It is important to note that the majority of the participants were female, compromising 67% of the total sample. One surprising finding was that 60% of participants admitted to checking Facebook more than 8 times a day. Out of the 60 people who took the survey, only 2 people did not have a Facebook.

Limitations to this study also exist. Further statistical tests, such as t-tests, should be implemented to see if a significant difference persists. Without statistics, results can oftentimes be misleading and inconclusive. In addition, it is crucial to examine other factors that may attribute to the third party effect, such as heightened ego and a sense of superiority. Future research should also expand the study to account for more differences. The majority of the population uses Facebook, and it is quintessential to obtain a more representative sample.

Tricount, a mobile app, manages and calculates group expenditures, so everyone knows who owes money to whom.

Unlike Austria and Germany, Hungary is preventing refugees, including their children, from entering the country.

Germany is a country known to welcome and help refugees. In fact, I met a refugee from Mali in the summer of 2014 as I was on a train from Konstanz to Switzerland. It's surprising to me that Hungary will not do the same.