Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks -

Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

The National Institutes of Health defined an electronic health record (EHR) as a digital version of the patient’s medical chart. It is maintained by the health provider and may contain all the crucial administrative and clinical data pertinent to the patient’s care under a specific provider. EHRs are associated with various advantages and disadvantages. The table below outlines the pros and cons of EHRs.

Pros	Cons
Improves quality of healthcare delivery. The EHR enables providers to more effectively diagnose patients, decrease medical errors, and provide safer care (Kataria & Ravindran, 2020).	Potential privacy and cybersecurity issues compromise the privacy and confidentiality of patients’ data (Kataria & Ravindran, 2020). EHR systems are vulnerable to attacks by hackers, which could lead to dire consequences when patients’ data get into the wrong hands.
Promotes quick access to patients’ health records, facilitating more coordinated and efficient care.	EHRs can give inaccurate patient data if they are not updated as soon as new patient information is gleaned. Failing to update patient information in the EHR could result in providers accessing and using incorrect or incomplete patient information (Kataria & Ravindran, 2020).
Provides accurate, up-to-date, and comprehensive information about a patient at the point of care (Kataria & Ravindran, 2020).	High costs are involved in setting up and switching over to a new EHR system in an organization and regularly maintaining the system.
Improves communication and collaboration among providers, thus facilitating care coordination.	Increases the likelihood of malpractice liability concerns for healthcare providers. Liability concerns include how the hospital will ensure crucial medical data is not destroyed or lost when being transferred from paper to electronic records (Kataria & Ravindran, 2020).

Stage 3 Objectives for Meaningful Use

The Stage 3 proposed rule is built upon the framework developed in previous meaningful use stages and continues to foster EHR

interoperability. The stage 3 meaningful use objectives selected for further research are: Generate and transmit prescriptions electronically and Actively engage in public health. With respect to electronic prescribing, CMS suggests increasing the upper limit for a menu set objective among eligible hospitals and clinics. Eligible providers should transmit more than 80% of their drug/treatment prescriptions electronically through certified EHR systems (Lite et al., 2020). In addition, more than 25% of hospital discharge medication orders will need to be electronically prescribed. The objective may impact my APN clinical practice since I will be expected to electronically send drug prescriptions to pharmacies to prevent fraudulent prescribing and ensure patient data is secure (Lite et al., 2020). Besides, I will embrace E-prescribing since it is crucial in preventing medical errors and illegal, fabricated prescriptions connected to drug abuse behaviors.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks

The objective of active engagement in public health builds on the requirements laid down in Stage 2 Meaningful Use regulations. It integrates some flexibilities, improvements, and innovations. In essence, the objective stresses the communication channels between providers, clinical data registries, and public health agencies (Lite et al., 2020). The objective may impact my future APN role in clinical practice since I will be required to engage with public health agencies and clinical data registries actively. Active engagement means that the APN is moving toward submitting production data” to a public health agency and clinical data registry (Lite et al., 2020). As an APN, I will demonstrate active engagement by completing registration to submit data, testing and validation, or production. Furthermore, I will be expected to send electronic public health data meaningfully using certified EHR systems.

Week 3: EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks References

Kataria, S., & Ravindran, V. (2020). Electronic health records: a critical appraisal of strengths and limitations. The journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, 50(3), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.4997/JRCPE.2020.309

Lite, S., Gordon, W. J., & Stern, A. D. (2020). Association of the Meaningful Use Electronic Health Record Incentive Program With Health Information Technology Venture Capital Funding. JAMA network open, 3(3), e201402. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1402

Purpose

The ideas and beliefs underpinning the discussions guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.

Activity Learning Outcomes

Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:

Contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a discussion environment that models professional and social interaction (CO4)
Actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty (CO5)

Requirements:

Post a written response in the discussion forum to EACH threaded discussion topic:

As discussed in the lesson and assigned reading for this week, EHRs provide both benefits and drawbacks. Create a â€œProsâ€ versus â€œConsâ€ table and include at least 3 items for each list. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you selected to include it on the respective list.
Refer to the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use located in this weekâ€™s lesson under the heading Meaningful Use and the HITECH Act. Select two objectives to research further. In your own words, provide a brief discussion as to how the objective may impact your role as an APN in clinical practice.

Adhere to the following guidelines regarding quality for the threaded discussions in Canvas:

Application of Course Knowledge: Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings.
Scholarliness and Scholarly Sources: Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions using valid, relevant, and reliable outside scholarly source to contribute to the discussion thread.
Writing Mechanics: Grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation are accurate. In-text and reference citations should be formatted using correct APA guidelines.
Direct Quotes: Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the grammar, syntax, APA category.
For each threaded discussion per week, the student will select no less than TWO scholarly sources to support the initial discussion post.

Scholarly Sources: Only scholarly sources are acceptable for citation and reference in this course. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. The textbooks and lessons are NOT considered to be outside scholarly sources. For the threaded discussions and reflection posts, reputable internet sources such as websites by government agencies (URL ends in .gov) and respected organizations (often ends in .org) can be counted as scholarly sources. The best outside scholarly source to use is a peer-reviewed nursing journal. You are encouraged to use the Chamberlain library and search one of the available databases for a peer-reviewed journal article. The following sources should not be used: Wikipedia, Wikis, or blogs. These websites are not considered scholarly as anyone can add to these. Please be aware that .com websites can vary in scholarship and quality. For example, the American Heart Association is a .com site with scholarship and quality. It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarship and quality of any .com site. Ask your instructor before using any site if you are unsure. Points will be deducted from the rubric if the site does not demonstrate scholarship or quality. Current outside scholarly sources must be published with the last 5 years. Instructor permission must be obtained BEFORE the assignment is due if using a source that is older than 5 years.

DISCUSSION CONTENT

Description

Application of Course Knowledge

33%

The quality for this category is determined by the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lessons and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations.

Scholarliness and Scholarly Resources

27%

This category is evaluated on the quality of the studentâ€™s ability to: Support writing with appropriate, scholarly sources; provide relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions; evaluate literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis; use sources published within the last 5 years; match reference list and in-text citations match, and minimize or appropriately format direct quotations.

Interactive Dialogue

27%

The quality for this category is determined by substantive written responses to a peer and faculty memberâ€™s questions in the threaded discussion. Substantive posts add importance, depth, and meaningfulness to the discussion. Students must respond to least one peer in the threaded discussion. If no question asked directly from faculty, student must respond to questions posed to the entire class. Post must include at least one scholarly source.