…research published Monday in the Journal Health Affairs found that doctors using computers to track tests, like X-rays and magnetic resonance imaging, ordered far more tests than doctors relying on paper records.

The use of costly image-taking tests has increased sharply in recent years. Many experts contend that electronic health records will help reduce unnecessary and duplicative tests by giving doctors more comprehensive and up-to-date information when making diagnoses.

The study showed, however, that doctors with computerized access to a patient’s previous image results ordered tests on 18 percent of the visits, while those without the tracking technology ordered tests on 12.9 percent of visits. That is a 40 percent higher rate of image testing by doctors using electronic technology instead of paper records.”

I can’t say that I’m surprised by this. I remember something similar when I was working as the night pharmacist at Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital in Salinas, California. Physicians that were using pre-printed order forms to admit patients – now considered the standard of practice – almost always wrote for more PRN medications than those that didn’t use pre-printed order forms. We used to call them “don’t call me orders” because they covered every possible what-if for the patient, i.e. what if they have pain, what if they get a fever, what if they get indigestion or constipation, and so on. And why did they do that? Because it was easy to check a box, that’s why.

I think highly of Shareable Ink. I like the concept and think it provides a nice bridge between where we are today and where we need to be. I first mentioned Shareable Ink back in November 2009. It was a good idea then, and it’s a good idea now.

More and more studies are questioning the efficacy of electronic health records, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has begun collecting reports involving electronic health and IT errors, some of which have resulted in death…

“The thing about these systems is that it doesn’t really look like they’re getting any cheaper,” he said. “And the upgrades and the upkeep represents a very significant cost, especially in outpatient clinics.”

Of those, 163 contained mistakes that could have led to “adverse drug events.” Most errors were mistakes of omission — a doctor left out an important piece of data.

Notably, this “is consistent with the literature on manual handwritten prescription error rates,” the report said. But the larger point is computerized systems do not automatically outperform paper ones. [referring to: Errors associated with outpatient computerized prescribing systems. JAMIA, 2011; DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000205]

For an industry that relies on data and evidence-based measurements to make decisions on the clinical and pharmaceutical side, there isn’t a lot of evidence supporting the notion that electronic health records produce cheaper care or better outcomes.

I think the article outlines some of the significant problems that need to be addressed before a truly effective EHR system can be utilized. We’re forcing the healthcare industry to implement a technology that they’re simply not ready for. The IT infrastructure in healthcare is built on marbles and is still years behind the consumer market in all but the most advanced facilities. In addition we continue to struggle to standardize information. We first need to understand what the information will look like before we begin forcing everyone to use it.

There’s no question in my mind that sharing information across the healthcare continuum is paramount to providing safe, efficient, cost effective healthcare. However, there are some key pieces of the puzzle missing. Without those pieces we’re not going to get the whole picture, and that’s a problem.

• 80% were concerned with stolen personal information
• 64% were concerned with lost, damaged or corrupted files
• 62% were concerned with the misuse of information”

I’m not surprised by the numbers. In general people are afraid of change and the unknown. With that said, I think all you need to do is walk a patient through the paper processes that we use now to give them some insight into how bad things really are. Stolen and lost personal and medical information is a major problem within the current healthcare system. It’s not uncommon in any given week to hear about patient records that have been lost or stolen. And as far as misuse of information, well lets just say that’s all too common as well.

The advantages to an EHR outweigh the concerns listed above. Just sayin’.

EHR Bloggers: “We’re excited to bring you a major new feature for your EHR account today: drug-drug and drug-allergy interaction alerts. It’s a frequently requested enhancement and also a big step towards Meaningful Use. And, like all our features, this clinical decision support system (CDSS) is entirely free.

Drug Interaction Alerts
You will now be automatically alerted when a drug you are adding, prescribing or refilling interacts with another drug or with an allergy listed in the patient’s chart. The following video shows you how to set permissions, heed alerts and override alerts. “

To gain access and begin using the Practice Fusion EHR simply sign up for a free account here. I would encourage any practitioner that needs a robust, easy to use EHR system to give Practice Fusion a look. It’s a solid application.

I was going to try the new feature for myself, but forgot my credentials; how embarrassing.

Integration of medical device data into EMRs is highly desireable, and many vendors have broached the subject. The reality, however, is that few vendors have been able to create a reliable way of pulling that data into an usable EMR format in real-time. During this years Siemens Innovations conference, I received a private showing of Siemens EMR, i.e. Soarian, and its ability to pull data from several medical devices. As impressive as the display was it still required quite a bit of manual manipulation by the end user to be useful.

The sticking point in all this data collection appears to be the inability of all the different vendors to get on the same page. I spent some time last year speaking with one particular vendor about the issue and they agreed that the difficulty wasn’t necessarily the data, but gaining access to it.

From a pharmacists perspective data from vital sign monitors, ventilators, infusion pumps and blood glucose monitors would be of particular interest as this information is often collected manually and used to make decisions regarding patient care and medication use.

Instead of creating another third party solution to collect and manage all this information, maybe it’s time for vendors to sit down and find a common ground on which to build. I’m just sayin’.

The new Intelligent Medical Devices HIMSS Analytics white  paper referred to in the EMR Daily News article can be found here.

Abstract:

This paper discusses how to share medical information between heterogeneous applications via web services. Our design theory is based on a real-options framework, performance analysis and experience building iRevive, a working web-services-enabled pre-hospital documentation application. The trade-offs between efficiency and flexibility are examined in the context of exchanging information based on emerging standards in the healthcare world. These trade-offs are quantified using a real-options approach. We illustrate the importance of uncertainty in deciding the architecture enabling an application to access medical information from Electronic Medical Records (EMRs).

The article goes into quite a bit of detail in describing the trade-offs between getting access to all the information necessary to perform your job and the need for usability and speed in a data driven system. The article centered on building an integrated hospital EMR system designed to collect data via web services instead of the “every day” desktop applications typically seen in a hospital.

Some of the key points from the article include:

• Web services are a good choice for promoting the exchange of information among various systems.
• As uncertainty in data requirements goes up, so does the need for flexibility in the system. Unfortunately the same uncertainty that requires flexibility also creates inefficiency and complexity in design, i.e. how can a developer build software to capture and use data when the end user is uncertain about what data needs to be collected and how they’re going to use it.
• Modularity in EMR data design can be good or bad depending on the needs of the end user and the money available to design the system. However, increased modularity doesn’t necessarily equal increased integration or performance. It has the potential, however to create standardization and simplification.
• There are many different architectures to consider when designing an EMR capable of sharing data, but the design must balance efficiency and flexibility with usability.

The article offers an interesting perspective on system design as the authors delve into the trade-off between flexibility and efficiency in any system. According to the authors “when the designer understands users’ needs, then a focus on efficient web services makes sense”; that about sums it up for me. Anytime someone wants to get away from the desktop I consider it a positive.

The article uses an application called iRevive to illustrate several points. iRevive is a mobile data collection system for use by healthcare professionals in the field. I don’t think the product still exists as the company website looks like it’s been neglected for quite some time.

1. Gaynor, M., Myung, D., Restuccia, J. and Moulton, S. (2010) ‘Designing infrastructure to exchange Electronic Medical Records with web services’, Int J. Biomedical Engineering and Technology, Vol. 3, Nos. ¾, pp. 393-412

Following my blog post last Friday where I threatened to take a drive to San Francisco for a demo of their software, Emily from Practice Fusion left this comment:

“No need for the road trip. You can get your own free EMR account with Practice Fusion in just a few seconds online here – https://pfws.practicefusion.com/apps/ehr/main.html?signup=true
Have fun testing it out. Feel free to reach out if you want more details.“

So I followed the link. The Practice Fusion site claims that any new user can be up and running within five minutes, i.e. “Live in Five”. They weren’t kidding. It only took me couple of minutes to get my login and password, and I off to the races.

The setup was incredibly simple and I found the user interface to be intuative and easy to use. It only took me a moment to get a new patient in the system and start creating a medical history. The Practice Fusion EMR uses a tabbed interface with clearly marked headers for Home, Schedule, Charts, e-Scripts, Messages, Documents, Reports and Admin. Below the primary tabs is a secondary set of tabs that gives the user access to online help videos, the recent activity of users, a “Community” area for additional information and a Marketplace where you can access consultants. However, once you enter the patient information area the secondary tabs disappear and you’re presented with nothing but a clean, unhindered user interface with easy access to your patients.

The medication section is pretty nice as you can easily search for a drug by simply typing in a few letters of the drug name and hitting ‘Enter’. The search works for both brand and generic name. The application even offers the ability to generate and send electronic prescriptions. This is a great feature. Electronic prescribing is a much better way of doing things as paper scripts often get lost, torn or forgotten.

As a pharmacist there are a couple of things I would like to see added to the medication area in Practice Fusion. First, there appears to be no cross checking between allergies and newly entered medications. I added a penicillin allergy to my patient and had no trouble ordering amoxicillin without any warnings. Second, I would like to see some clinical decision support around medication entry. There appears to be no clinical checking against coded diagnosis or the patients active medications. I was able to enter an amiodarone prescription on top of a warfarin prescription without warning. I assume that Practice Fusion expects individual pharmacies to police patient allergies and drug-drug interactions. While that is a reasonable assumption, it would be nice to see some kind of clinical chekcing in the application. Finally, I would like to see a more robust sig area within the prescription writer. I created some cool sigs while playing around with the app. I should say cool for me, but not for the pharmacist receiving them. I would have definitely received a phone call for clarification. With all that said, it is important to remember that the Practice Fusion application is not a pharmacy order entry system, is very robust and is available completely free of charge.

There are other modules available inside the Practice Fusion application, but I didn’t play with those as they had to do with insurances, billing, etc. Just not my cup of tea.

Pharmacists should take note of applications like the Practice Fusion EMR because it is clearly in their best interest. As pharmacists move into the medical home or into clinics to manage anticoagulation, hypertension, heart failure, weight loss and diabetes they will be exposed to EHR/EMR systems like Practice Fusion. They offer several advantages over legacy software systems and paper charting. Web-based medical records are the future of healthcare, so it’s best to just get used to the idea.

Oh, one other thing of note. I couldn’t view the Practice Fusion EMR on either my DROID or my iPhone; Flash issues. The application is easy to use from a desktop computer or a laptop, but it would be nice to use a smartphone to access your patient’s information in a pinch. Froyo, a.k.a. Andorid 2.2, is supposed to rectify issues with Flash. I’m looking forward to giving it another try once I update my DROID.

Throw in all the information above along with the fact that Dell and Practice Fusion have partnered to provide a ready made hardware solution to go with their EMR, and you’ve got a nice setup.

According to the Practice Fusion site:

The 1st Edition of Keys to EMR Success, was the HIMSS Book of the Year Award winner. In this revised Edition, nationally recognized expert Ron Sterling has included new chapters on EHR and Malpractice Risk, ARRA and Meaningful Use as well as detailed coverage of conversion issues for practices that have an old EMR.

“There is no question,” says Sterling, “that the selection and implementation of an EHR is a ‘bet-the-practice’ proposition. If you fail, you end up with more costs and greater frustration. Yet, few practices will be able to avoid implementing EHRs.”

I looked for the book in the usual places, i.e. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, etc. I found the first addition, but no luck on the second. I even had hopes of finding it in electronic format for the Nook, Kindle or even the iPad. Nope. So if you want to purchase the book you’ll need to go directly to the Greenbranch Publishing website.

While contemplating purchasing this book something occured to me. With the length of time it takes to publish a book, how relative would this material be to the current state of EHR/EMR implementation? Technology is moving at lightning speed. Maybe it’s time to consider a new way of disseminating information like this. Just a thought.

Most consumers don’t do a very good job of keeping track of their medications; much less the medication names, dosages, what they are used for and when they were last taken. It’s not uncommon on admission to the hospital for a patient to say things like “I take a blood pressure pill” or “a pain pill” or “a water pill”. As a pharmacist I can make gross generalizations about these medications, and can narrow the options down with aggressive questioning, but can rarely be sure without seeing the medication for myself.

The Electronic Health Record Incentive Program, a.k.a. Meaningful Use guidelines, calls for medication reconciliation to be used for at least 80 percent of “relevant encounters and transitions of care” (page 95). In addition “the capability to perform medication reconciliation is included in the certification standards for certified EHR technology.” This is easier said than done.

Most medication reconciliation begins in the Emergency Department. It is typically a manual system of information collected by nurses who in turn pass it off to the physician for approval. Unfortunately many physicians don’t take the time to scrutinize the medication list which is often inaccurate or incomplete.

The ideal list of medications currently being taken by a patient wouldn’t be generated by the patient at all. Instead the list would be downloaded from a nationally standardized e-pharmacy. Of course no such thing exists, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t.

In theory all medications taken by patients are filled in a pharmacy, whether that is a chain pharmacy, community pharmacy or mail order pharmacy. Modern pharmacies are computerized and connected to the internet so that insurance adjudication can take place. The same data should be transmitted to a centralized e-pharmacy where it would be stored and accessed by hospitals during patient admissions. The list would follow the patient throughout their admission and be finalized on discharge. After all, the medication use profile is never more accurate than at the time of discharge.

In the absence of a centralized e-pharmacy, several vendors offer software applications designed to help hospitals maintain a digital medication reconciliation record. Most of these applications can be integrated into the pharmacy information system, making the process a little easier. The solution is not ideal, but it is better than a manual system with pen and paper.

Some vendors that offer medication reconciliation software are listed below.

RxReconcile
MedsTracker
RcopiaAC
MediRec
Mediware’s ClosedLoop Clinical Systems
HCS Medication Reconciliation