Electronic Health Records Legal and Safety Issues Literature Review
J Chiropr Humanit. 2017 Dec; 24(ane): 31–xl.
A Literature Review of Electronic Health Records in Chiropractic Practice: Mutual Challenges and Solutions
Received 2016 Jul 24; Revised 2016 Dec 3; Accepted 2016 Dec three.
Abstract
Objective
The purpose of this report was to review the literature on electric current challenges and propose solutions for the optimal utilization of the electronic health records (EHRs) in chiropractic practice.
Methods
A search was performed in the PubMed, Index of Chiropractic Literature, and Current Index to Nursing and Centrolineal Health Literature databases from November 2005 to February 2015. A combination of the following key words was used: electronic wellness records, electronic medical records, implementation, documentation, benefits, and challenges. Articles were categorized into common issues and solutions. These were filtered past awarding to chiropractic or educational institutions.
Results
The search resulted in 45 papers, which included case reports of EHR implementation, governmental insurance reports, commentaries, controlled studies, narrative reviews of past experiences with conversion from paper systems, and the implementation of EHRs in small-scale offices and chiropractic offices. Minimal literature was found that directly related to chiropractic EHRs. Improper utilization, incorrect apply of the software, faulty implementation, workflow burdens, fiscal considerations, and bereft training were found to negatively touch on the quality of the record.
Conclusions
Documentation errors are often innate in the EHR software. Improper utilization, insufficient training, or difficulty in integration of the EHR into the clinical office setting results in poor implementation of the electronic version of the clinical record. Solutions that may decrease documentation errors include EHR preparation, continued financial incentives, and appropriate implementation process and utilization of available software features.
Key Indexing Terms: Electronic Wellness Records, Chiropractic, Wellness Education, Ideals
Introduction
The quality of health care records came into question in the 1960s when Weed1 published a written report on the lack of interprofessional communication about patient intendance that was affecting the quality of the intendance rendered. He created the problem-oriented medical tape (POMR) and opined that the wellness intendance record was "key to patient care and the educational activity of healthcare."1 The POMR provided organization of the health care tape and continuity of care between physicians and interns.i This improved patient care, and the organisation was eventually adopted by medicine and then by other health care providers. Fifteen years later, the chiropractic profession instituted this organisation. Thereafter, the third-party payors required an increased level of documentation of the medical necessity of care. By the tardily 1990s, managed intendance reinforced the necessity of a POMR and the daily SOAP (Subjective, Objective, Cess, and Programme) notes. Licensing board complaints, regarding the insufficient quality of the records, resulted in the introduction of new board policy guidelines and regulations on documentation and record keeping.ii, 3 Many managed care organizations likewise issued policy guidelines. In 2006, the Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards passed a resolution that further strengthened the implementation of advisable documentation. This resolution recommended that "all state boards crave a class in the topic of documentation for re-licensure," and that the Council of Chiropractic Instruction (CCE) "accredited colleges provide grooming in documentation in the basic Dr. of Chiropractic curriculum."3 Documentation of the clinical see with the patient and the controlling process became a required part of the clinical record. In 2008, the chiropractic "best practices" document informed the clinician of the importance of the clinical process during the meet.4 Meanwhile, payors increased the extent and the caste of the record reviews.5 Despite the professional recommendations and insurance requirements, the American Chiropractic Association stated that the lack of appropriate documentation in clinical records continued to prove upward in audits and was compromising the practices of a number of practitioners because of tertiary-party payor denials.6, 7, viii
This necessity of an increased level of documentation created a burden on the practicing clinician, which led to evolution of the electronic format. Early efforts to enter the electronic health record (EHR) motion resulted in the implementation of barcoded note-capturing software, rather than a true EHR. The software was expected to increase dr. efficiency and decrease the time for documentation. The software companies imagined their barcoded systems would enable practitioners to run across more patients in their workday. The weakness in this initial EHR organization is that it simply provided an organized directory of patients' wellness without sufficient variability or customization to clearly document the specifics of the patient encounter.5, ix This resulted in repetition of language, findings, courses of intendance, outcomes, duration, and dosages. This type of note-capturing generates similar daily notes because of the electronically generated repetitive information. It failed to substantiate the care rendered.5
In that location are currently numerous EHR software programs bachelor for the practicing doctor of chiropractic. However, information technology is unknown how the practitioner may know which EHR system is most advisable for clinical documentation or how he or she should implement it for maximum utility. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to review the literature of the current challenges of chiropractic EHRs and to provide suggestions for futurity direction.
Methods
The literature search was conducted from November 2014 through February 2015. STARLITE (sampling strategy, type of study, approaches, range of years, limits, inclusion and exclusions, terms used, electronic sources) search strategy with the terms documentation, electronic wellness record, implementation, benefits, and challenges was used10 (Fig 1). The report included narrative reviews, commentaries, instance studies, case serial, surveys, clinical example studies, randomized controlled studies, governmental reports, and insurance company reports. The written report likewise included reports on the progress of implementation of EHRs, quality of documentation, or experience in teaching facilities. The search was limited to the English language, and the databases searched were PubMed, Current Index to Nursing and Allied Wellness Literature, and Alphabetize of Chiropractic Literature. The search was further limited to manufactures directly applicable to small-scale chiropractic offices and teaching clinics. Reference tracking was used to identify additional citations. Large national network or hospital studies, radiology- or laboratory-related studies, and studies that involved specific conditions were excluded considering the implementation problems were non likely to be applicative to individual chiropractic practice or teaching facilities. The last results eliminated duplicates and those citations that were not relevant to the topics of interest.
Search strategy diagram. STARLITE, sampling strategy, type of study, approaches, range of years, limits, inclusion and exclusions, terms used, electronic sources.
Results
A total of 45 full-text articles from all databases were used. At that place were reports of implementation in pocket-sized medical offices,11 satisfaction with EHR systems,12, 13 and methods of importing the documentation content.14 All of these reports indicated consistent issues that affected the quality of the documentation. Commentaries revealed the use and misuse of the documentation information generated by EHR systems.14 One study looked at the sociological aspect of EHR systems and how it affected the quality of intendance.15 This study provided insight into the physician-computer-patient relationship, with the computer demanding more attention than the patient. The computer intervention resulted in the medico missing nonverbal patient communication, resulting in a negative consequence on quality of care. At that place were 10 governmental and private insurance reports found and 8 used. These reports reviewed the overall EHR system utilization rate and provided an overview of the trend. Common themes noted throughout the articles reviewed were difficulties in utilization of all the features of the new software, intrusive change in workflow, fiscal constraints on small office budgets, and imposition in the doc-patient human relationship, which ofttimes led to dissatisfaction in practice. At that place was inconsistent reporting on the effects of EHRs on changes in quality of care but consensus on the other issues.
An analysis of the utilization reports demonstrated an increment in wellness intendance utilization of EHRs over the past 14 years. Hing16 reported that the national wellness statistics manifested 34.8% utilization by function-based physicians. This showed an increase of 91% over the 2001 statistics.16 Use increased from 34% to 78% of role-based physicians in 2013.17 Current usage in chiropractic has been estimated by Smith of the American Chiropractic Association to be only 33% of the profession, lagging behind other role-based physicians.eighteen Electronic health record conversion from newspaper files increased over the past 12 years. Grouping practices were more than likely to use EHRs (74.three%) than solo practices were (20.6%). A higher use rate of EHRs was found in multispecialty practices (52.5%) than in single-specialty (30.3%) or in non-hospital associated practices (20%) or nonacademic practices (14%).16, 19, 20 To increment the utilization of EHRs for documentation, the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included funding to promote their adoption by practitioners. As of March 2015, $20 billion in incentives were provided to all provider types.16 Of this amount, $195 one thousand thousand has gone to chiropractic physicians, indicating that there is a growing percentage of federally qualified, meaningful use EHRs in chiropractic offices.21
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act also directed wellness data engineering science to promote improved quality and efficiency of intendance and to reduce medical errors. Hospitals adopted EHRs, with 97% reporting possession of a certified EHR and 76% having adopted it in 2014.22 Smaller practitioner offices were slower in adoption.22, 23 In 2008, the American Medical Association (AMA) reported an fifty-fifty lower figure than the national health statistics, with only 17% of office-based physicians utilizing EHRs in some grade, and only 4% of these were fully functional in the office.24 In 2014, the AMA reported only 2% of role-based physicians qualifying for phase 2 meaningful utilize.25 It appears that, in spite of the incentives to foster EHR use, bodily implementation was slower in the independent offices, and full-feature capabilities were non implemented.
The AMA, the Institute of Medicine, and many nonprofit and professional organizations promoted increased adoption to better public health, patient safety, quality, medical liability defence, and research.26 "Pay for Operation Plans" promoted use of EHRs equally part of their measurement for quality-of-care goals. This was reinforced in November 2016 by Medicare with a new rule that promotes a merit-based incentive payment organisation through the certified EHR engineering science.27 The Bureau for Healthcare Research and Quality reported that utilize of EHRs supported a consistently higher standard of intendance across the country.28
Discussion
To the best of the author's knowledge, this is the start paper to review the literature on the challenges and solutions to EHR implementation in chiropractic practice. The findings indicate that the primary challenges with EHRs were in proper documentation, financial constraints, logistical changes in workflow, intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship, and difficulty in implementing the new process. The literature revealed the potential pitfalls of introduction of new errors into patient records. The pitfalls differed depending on the size of the do, health care system, or teaching facility.
Challenges: Documentation Errors
This literature review revealed the common occurrence of problems with the utilize of templates and macros.12 These generated an unnecessary volume of notes with redundant and irrelevant information. The high volume resulted in inefficiency of review time, similar to illegible handwritten notes. In many instances, template-based notes introduced false data to the record every bit a issue of the user clicking a wrong box, calling upwards old data, or using old notes equally a template with failure to update that portion of the information or notation. Doctor transition would exacerbate this problem, when one doctor took over care from another. The new physician may non accept been familiar with the software and might take relied on the previous notes by invoking the "copy forward" notes option without updating the instance. This is particularly credible in teaching clinics. Weis points out that "templates, macros, automated information points, and re-create-forward of an entire old note are simply a few of the content-importing technology techniques"14 that create efficiencies of care and opportunities to meliorate the delivery of care and rail the care but are frequently driveling and misused, resulting in misrepresentation of the patient come across every bit a result of cloned notes. The Veterans Assistants reviewed 243 patient records from 1993 to 2002 and found that 2645 notes contained significant amounts of copied text, indicating a high prevalence in that care organization. This included diagnostic errors that were inadvertently copied and pasted from previous notes.14 This literature assay revealed these practices to exist a common occurrence in the records. This practice prohibited the integration of the advisable clinical bear witness into the EHR.
Although positive software features were available to amend the documentation, in that location was reported insufficient utilization of these features.29 Boonstra'southward systematic review provided a good summary of the issues with EHRs. He ended that this major change in a practice requires a "change managing director" to oversee all of the implementation.thirty He also pointed out that various barriers to total utilization of all bachelor software features contributed to these errors equally an underlying crusade.23, thirty
The Medicare Comprehensive Error Charge per unit Testing review process found many mutual errors being carried through from the written tape to the EHR entry. Although the notes are more legible than the written record, the carry-through errors include incomplete progress notes with insufficient detail, lack of a date or a signature, and lack of documentation of orders of different procedures or care plans. The Medicare chiropractic reviews revealed insufficient documentation to prove that care was non maintenance care.31 Thorough documentation is necessary for 3rd-party payors to evaluate the medical necessity of intendance. It is too necessary for quality of care. Electronic wellness records are intended to overcome the problems of insufficient clinical detail by providing the bones clinical, financial, legal, and insurance needs of documentation32 (Fig 2). However, the reviewed literature revealed that there is a high rate of failure of the utilization of all of the features of EHRs. Poor data is available to inform the practitioner of what is required for utilization of all the features of the software program and successful implementation of the EHR.33
Basic requirements of electronic health tape system.
Challenges: Barriers to Implementation
Inappropriate EHR implementation can issue in financial bug, logistical problems, and inherent misuse or abuse of the EHR (Fig three). High costs, lack of certification of some products, and initial disruptive effects on practices all contribute to the difficulty in integration of the EHRs into practice. The disconnect among who pays for the EHR, who profits from it, and who is in accuse of the implementation presents significant challenges that accept prevented full EHR apply in small independent offices.22, 34 Smaller independent offices have more difficulty absorbing the large upfront costs, decreased revenue during initial implementation, ongoing maintenance costs, and increased costs of hardware and software.22, 34 This is in spite of the potential long-term savings.
Challenges in electronic health record (EHR) implementation.
A major implementation barrier was the lack of training of staff and doctors.35 This resulted in a decreased quality of clinical documentation and subsequent subtract in practice satisfaction.12, 13 Other barriers to total software characteristic implementation of EHRs have been reported to include a lack of incentive considering of no vested involvement in the EHR organization by many users, psychosocial factors, fiscal factors, bereft software grooming and utilization, lack of involvement of all staff in the implementation process, interoperability of unlike software systems, and a misunderstanding of the bones needs of documentation.23, 30, 34, 36, 37
Challenges: Medico Satisfaction
Dr. satisfaction with use of the EHR is a gene in the caste of implementation and utilization. A RAND (Research and Development corporation) study performed past Friedberg for the AMA in 2013 revealed that the EHR and the resultant implementation burdens they put on practitioners are a major reason for doc's lack of satisfaction with practise.12 Sixty-five percent opined that the EHR failed to amend their job satisfaction. The EHR's upshot on job satisfaction exceeded the outcome of health care commitment organisation changes on doctors' chore satisfaction. Despite this, 61% still felt that the EHR improved the quality of care, but many felt that it interfered with contiguous time with the patient. This was often due to the medico having to face the screen to enter information instead of facing the patient, causing him or her to miss torso linguistic communication, emotional responses, or opportunities to ask clarifying questions. Doctors were forced to separate their attending between the reckoner and the patient. If they chose to provide all their attending to the patient, they were encumbered with lengthening their piece of work hours to enter the data at lunchtime or after hours. The doc is inhibited from creating a trusting, confident relationship with the patient. Surprisingly, in spite of the problems with EHRs, less than 20% of practitioners desired a render to manual records.12
Benefits of EHR Documentation
Electronic wellness records have inherent potential benefits that allow for improved quality of the clinical documentation in a more than efficient manner. Some of the chiropractic EHR programs link up to a common database of prescription drugs. This allows doctors of chiropractic to obtain of import information on the medications a patient takes, which would diminish the reliance on the accuracy of a patient'southward ability to recite medication lists. Other programs have specific features to increase efficiency, quality, continuity of care, and patient safety. These benefits should provide an incentive for further EHR utilization by chiropractic physicians. Boosted essential gimmicky issues that any EHR documentation should satisfy (Fig 4)38 include protection of the legal liability of the practitioner, enhanced reimbursement, and public health problems.
Essential issues that an electronic health record must satisfy.
Samaan38 reported that the implementation of EHRs resulted in a decreased frequency of incomplete charts three days postvisit and an increment in evaluation/direction level coding, which resulted in increased income. There was also an eventual subtract in number of support staff, after the prolong implementation period.38 This would indicate the potential of EHRs to improve efficiency and amend the budget of the chiropractic office. Liang39 noted a perspective almost the potential of EHRs to introduce new evidence from the patient population and to diffuse literature-based evidence into practice more than quickly via integration of best practices into the clinical support software.39 This creates potential to enhance the ability of the chiropractic practitioner to ameliorate the clinical documentation, decision making, and quality of care. Additional long-term savings through financial efficiencies and decreased staff are also reported,38 which support the financial benefit to the small chiropractic function.
As Dr. Weed stated 45 years agone, the clinical record is nonetheless central to care.1 This remains true, regardless of the format. Yet, the realization of the potential advantages of EHRs has lagged backside the implementation in spite the increased adoption charge per unit. Regardless, the literature reports go along to expound the potential.40 Electronic wellness records literature specific to chiropractic practice is sparse. This review revealed only 4 peer-reviewed manuscripts and other trade periodical, association, and governmental reports that address chiropractic documentation.
Recommendations for the Profession
Basic Needs of Documentation
Chiropractic EHR systems need to have features that allow customization of each encounter, to let the appropriate documentation that attends to the basic documentation needs. Gutheil outlined three basic principles for documentation (Fig 2): the risk-benefit analysis, the apply of clinical judgment, and patients' capacity to participate in their own care.41 He refers to the necessity to document not but the risks, but also the benefits of care. This is particularly important to comply with fully informed consent. It also protects the clinician's liability and segues to the 2nd principle of documenting the clinical judgment. An important cistron related to clinical judgment is that it must exist congruent with the clinical needs documented in the subjective presentation, objective findings, and overall patient assessment. The third principle states that the patient should exist the primary master. Therefore, the records, whether written or electronic, need to chronicle the participation of the patient in his or her own care. This can be done through direct quotes in the subjective section, issue measures, or recording the patient's responses to the intendance. Documentation of these principles is hard with preprogramed macros and templates and demand customization.
To integrate the clinical data in an appropriate manner, it is recommended that the provider buy and implement an EHR that fulfills the basic needs (Fig 2). Copied or cloned data must be reviewed and edited past the provider with each note generation. The note must exist specific and pertinent to that clinical meet. Copying unabridged sections of a document should exist prohibited to avoid note redundancy. Students and doctors need to be trained to avoid overdocumentation by inserting false or irrelevant information. Training should likewise include proper apply of macros, templates, or repetitive automobile-population of fields in the software organisation. Histories, and both subjective and objective findings, need to be specifically constructed on each visit. Electronic wellness records volition not innately correct bear-frontwards input problems. Repetitive pasting or conveying frontward of the diagnosis in the Assessment section of the daily note fails to provide any ongoing clinical decision making. This is vital to support the level of the coding or the substantiation of the care. In consideration of federal compliance and legal protection, even with a sophisticated EHR system, there must be capability for the individual doctor to sign the notes. In doing so, the signer acknowledges responsibleness for the content.
Funding of EHRs in Chiropractic
Small offices, which predominate in chiropractic, have financial difficulties in making the change to EHRs. The authorities incentive has expired, and other incentives are needed that encourage the change. Ryan42 reported that financial incentives for conversion to EHRs promote implementation with associated quality in intendance. One such experiment was successfully instituted by North Shore Infirmary, NY. They found that most offices that lacked EHRs were small offices. Ryan reported an offering of up to $40 000 per office for the conversion to, and implementation of, EHRs. The report establish that fiscal incentives and technical support resulted in improved quality of intendance.43 This study provides an indication of the demand for ongoing fiscal incentives as governmental incentives expire. Considering the bulk of chiropractic practices are pocket-sized offices, a similar incentive by payors would assist in the sharing of the expense for the demands of the payors.
Purchasing EHRs
The power to integrate the appropriate clinical information into the EHR is dependent on the quality of the software purchased. In consideration of the level of technical, compliance, and documentation knowledge and sophistication of the boilerplate medico of chiropractic, providers need preliminary EHR preparation to guide them in their EHR evaluation and purchase. McGregor37 did a fine job of outlining the stages of evaluation. A number of pointed questions are outlined for advice (Fig 5). Diamond et al44 also provide a dainty scorecard to compare vendors. They fix a method of comparing vendors and looking at support, hardware, software, workflows, and reporting with specific criteria outlined.44 Maust35 discusses the necessary training and outlines specific questions to ask vendors. Without proper purchase and training, documentation would remain insufficient, regardless of the investment.
Questions to ask when purchasing an electronic health record (EHR) system. (Data from McGregor.38)
EHR Implementation
After an appropriate EHR purchase is made, the ability to integrate the clinical data is still contingent on an implementation program for all doctors, interns, staff, and centrolineal wellness assistants. The success of full implementation and utilization of all features depends on the preparation.45 This includes the training in the sociological aspect of utilizing the EHR during the patient contact. Some suggestions are intuitive only need to be emphasized (Fig 6).15, 36, 46, 47
Recommendations for optimal electronic health record (EHR) implementation and documentation. (Data from Maust,35 Fleurant,45 Bostrom,36 Torda,46 Fredericks,fifteen and Lyons.47)
Wuerth48 makes the following additional suggestions: Be patient; competency in EHRs tin can take up to a yr. Until that time, 1 can expect a decrease in productivity. He also emphasizes the importance of non assuasive the EHR to directly patient contact, but that information technology is important to allow patients to participate in the EHR. Facing the patient instead of the computer for most of the encounter is integral to the contact.
In spite of the difficulties, the preparation of new doctors volition demand to include how to integrate quality information and any literature references into the documented electronic tape. Preparation in the appropriate EHR begins with the new doctors entering the occupation. Interns in teaching institutions may only obtain an introduction to EHRs. They volition ofttimes have bereft fourth dimension in their clinic rotations to become competent and skilful.48 It might be hard to constitute EHRs in a teaching dispensary, unless the attending clinicians are the master providers of care vs the interns. Information technology is probable that workflows would never get established because of the ongoing EHR learning, accommodation periods, and transitional nature of interns. The constant transition period would cause longer patient wait times and further prolong the intern-patient contact time, decrease patient flow, and diminish income. Because of the growing need for the chiropractor to provide clinical evidence in the documentation, it is yet suggested that interns be provided additional preparation and simulated entries for virtual patients earlier entering the clinical surroundings.
Nearly EHR documentation errors are innate in the EHR software. As an incidental note, the high prevalence of inherent errors from these sources, regardless of the specialty, appears to contradict a perception of documentation fraud by the individual practitioner. Chiropractic record comeback will require diligence to the educational process, purchase of the appropriate EHR software, attention to the implementation process, training of staff and chiropractors, advisable utilization, and considerateness to the data entry past the treating doctor. It will as well crave the practitioner to maximize the existing features of the software and customize it to the do. Funding from sources outside the chiropractic profession might be necessary to reach all the goals of the quality chiropractic EHR. Until these bug are addressed, the clinical data may proceed to be deficient in the EHR. This would result in an ongoing inability to demonstrate the necessity of care.
Finally, documentation serves many stakeholders. Readers other than the treating doctor will include the consulting md, other health care practitioners involved in the intendance, the payor, the insurer, the reviewer, and, if information technology goes to court for any reason, the chaser. The necessary contents of the tape are outlined in Medicare meaningful utilize criteria and by the National Commission for Quality Assurance.49 Most of these government and quality assurance guidelines target the primary care practitioner. Although some of it does not immediately apply to chiropractic practitioners, they are now being held responsible to a similar level of documentation by the payors. Overall, if doctors of chiropractic tin follow the recommendations in this paper, then they tin can provide sufficient clinical documentation in the electronic record for all potential readers of the tape. Additional resources on EHR implementation are available through the American Academy of Family Physicians and the National Institutes of Wellness.50, 51, 52
Limitations
Because this was a narrative review aimed at generating possible directions for the chiropractic profession, it was express in scope. The search strategy used may take missed relevant papers. In addition, other of import search engines were non used, and therefore, relevant papers to this topic may have been omitted. The search and review was performed by only i person, so some bias may have been introduced with interpretation.
Conclusions
This review revealed that the current quality of the documentation in EHRs remains a challenge, with insufficient documentation to substantiate the quality and necessity of intendance. Mutual errors in using the EHRs were found in both chiropractic and other wellness intendance practitioners. These errors were more often a result of issues with software misuse or abuse, budgetary constraints, bereft training, or carry-forward errors from transmission methods. Electronic health records training, continued financial incentives, appropriate implementation processes, and utilization of available software features may decrease documentation errors.
Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest
No funding sources or conflicts of interest were reported for this report.
Acknowledgments
The writer thanks Claire Noll, MS, CGS, MLIS, of the Texas Chiropractic Higher Library system for her helpful help. The author acknowledges Dr. John Ward and Dr. Cheryl Hawk for their input with this manuscript.
References
1. Weed LL. Medical records, patient intendance, and medical education. Irish J Med Sci. 1964;39(vi):271–282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Land of Massachusetts . 1999. Standards of Do and Professional person Deport, 233 CMR 4.05. [Google Scholar]
three. Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards . FCLB; Greeley, CO: 2006. Documentation and Record Keeping, Resolution #2-06; p. 2006. [Google Scholar]
4. Triano JJ. What constitutes evidence for best practise? J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008;31(ix):637–643. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Levinson D. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector Full general; Washington, DC: 2009. Inappropriate Medicare Payments for Chiropractic Services. [Google Scholar]
half dozen. Schetchikova NV. Documentation with EHR—easier, faster, meliorate? ACA News. 2011 Jan. [Google Scholar]
7. Kline CM. Chiropractic pinnacle: for the expert of the profession. ACA News. 2014 May [Google Scholar]
8. Levinson H. Managed care and chiropractic part ii: challenges ahead. J Am Chiropr Assoc. 2008;45(3):vii–12. [Google Scholar]
10. Booth A. "Brimful of STARLITE": toward standards for reporting literature searches. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006;94(4):421–429. e205. [PMC gratuitous commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Nemeth LS, Stuart GW, Ornstein SM. Implementing alter in primary intendance practices using electronic medical records: a conceptual framework. Implement Sci. 2008;3:3. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Friedberg K, Chen P, Van Busam KR. RAND Corporation; Santa Monica, CA: 2013. Factors Affecting Physician Professional Satisfaction and Their Implications for Patient Intendance, Health Systems, and Wellness Policy. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
thirteen. Gallegos A. Are you satisfied? What drives physician professional satisfaction in a time of dwindling face-time with patients? Mich Med. 2014;113(2):10–fourteen. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
fourteen. Weis JM, Levy PC. Copy, paste, and cloned notes in electronic health records: prevalence, benefits, risks, and all-time practice recommendations. Breast. 2014;145(3):632–638. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Fredericks M, Lyons L, Kondellas B, Ross MW, Hang L, Fredericks J. Chiropractic physicians: an analysis of select problems for the utilize of electronic medical records and the patient-practitioner relationship within the social club-culture-personality model. J Chiropr Humanit. 2009;sixteen(1):thirteen–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
sixteen. Hing Eastward, Hsiao C-J. Electronic medical record use by office-based physicians and their practices: United States, 2007. Natl Health Stat Report. 2010;31(23):one–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Hsiao CJ, Hing E. Use and characteristics of electronic wellness tape systems among function-based doctor practices: United States, 2001-2013. NCHS Information Brief. 2014;143:one–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Smith Yard., Young Chiliad. Information technology for clinical and business concern applications in chiropractic practice. J Am Chiropr Assoc. 2010;47(3):10–17. [Google Scholar]
xix. Bates DW. Rockville, Medico; Bureau for Healthcare Research & Quality: 2008. Statewide Implementation of Electronic Wellness Records. [Google Scholar]
20. Li J, Talaei-Khoei A, Seale H, Ray P, MacIntyre CR. Health care provider adoption of eHealth: systematic literature review. Collaborate J Med Res. 2013;2(1) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Middle for Medicare and Medicaid Services . Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Washington, DC: 2015. Medicare Incentive Payments. Due east.I. Program. [Google Scholar]
22. Goetz Goldberg D, Kuzel AJ, Feng LB, DeShazo JP, Lov LE. EHRs in primary intendance practices: benefits, challenges, and successful strategies. Am J Manag Care. 2012;18(2):e48–e54. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Valdes I, Kibbe DC, Tolleson G, Kunik ME, Petersen LA. Barriers to proliferation of electronic medical records. Inform Prim Care. 2004;12(1):3–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Belletti D, Zacker C, Mullins CD. Perspectives on electronic medical records adoption: electronic medical records (EMR) in outcomes research. Patient Relat Result Meas. 2010;one:29–37. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. American Medical Association Release of disappointing meaningful employ data prompts manufacture leaders to urge HHS to take immediate activity. AMA News Room. 2014 Nov 4 [Google Scholar]
26. Berko C. Amend documentation, better reimbursement. Today'south Chiropractic. 2002;31(6):56–58. [Google Scholar]
28. Agency for Healthcare Inquiry and Quality . AHRQ Publication No. 01-P020. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Rockville, Dr.: 2006. Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) Fact Sheet. [Google Scholar]
29. Price One thousand, Vocaliser A, Kim J. Adopting electronic medical records: are they simply electronic paper records? Can Fam Physician. 2013;59(seven):e322–e329. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Boonstra A, Broekhuis Thousand. Barriers to the credence of electronic medical records past physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:231. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. Medicare Learning Network . Section of Health & Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; Rockville, Dr.: 2014. Complying with Medical Record Documentation Requirements. [Google Scholar]
32. Scott RW. 4th ed. Jones & Bartlett Learning; Burlington, MA: 2011. Legal, Ethical, and Applied Aspects of Patient Care Documentation : a Guide for Rehabilitation Professionals; p. xix. [Google Scholar]
33. Logan J. Electronic health data system implementation models—a review. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;178:117–123. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. Baron RJ, Fabens Due east, Schiffman M, Wolf Due east. Electronic health records: but around the corner? Or over the cliff? Ann Intern Med. 2005;143(iii):222–226. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. Maust D. Implementation of an electronic medical record in a health arrangement: lessons learned. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2012;28(i):E11–E15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36. Bostrom AC, Schafer P, Dontje 1000, Pohl JM, Nagelkerk J, Cavanagh SJ. Electronic wellness record: implementation across the Michigan Academic Consortium. Comput Inform Nurs. 2006;24(1):44–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
37. McGregor DM. Evaluation of the steps for implementation of electronic health records for a small chiropractic do in Northern Michigan. J Chiropr Humanit. 2009;16(1):54–56. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
38. Samaan Z, Klein MD, Mansour ME, DeWitt TG. The bear upon of the electronic health record on an academic pediatric main care center. J Ambul Care Manage. 2009;32(3):180–187. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
39. Liang L. The gap between prove and exercise. Health Diplomacy. 2007;26(2):w119–w121. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40. Eisenberg M, Hom J, Sharp C. The electronic health record as a healthcare management strategy and implications for obstetrics and gynecologic practice. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2013;25(6):476–481. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
42. Ryan AM, McCullough CM, Shih SC, Wang JJ, Ryan MS, Casalino LP. The intended and unintended consequences of quality improvement interventions for small practices in a community-based electronic wellness record implementation projection. Med Intendance. 52(9):826-832. [PubMed]
43. Shea S, Hripcsak G. Accelerating the use of electronic health records in physician practices. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(iii):192–195. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44. Diamond Due east, French K, Gronkiewicz C, Borkgren Thousand. Electronic medical records: a practitioner'south perspective on evaluation and implementation. Chest. 2010;138(3):716–723. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45. Fleurant Thousand, Kell R, Jenter C. Factors associated with hard electronic health record implementation in office practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19(iv):541–544. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
46. Torda P, Han ES, Scholle SH. Easing the adoption and use of electronic wellness records in pocket-sized practices. Wellness Aff (Millwood) 2010;29(4):668–675. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47. Lyons JP, Klasko Due south. Introduction of an electronic medical record organisation into dr. practice offices: why is it so #%!&-ing hard for everybody? Part Iii. J Med Pract Manage. 2011;27(1):36–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48. Wuerth R, Campbell C, Rex WJ. Top ten tips for constructive use of electronic health records. Paediatr Child Health. 2014;19(three):138. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Manufactures from Journal of Chiropractic Humanities are provided here courtesy of National University of Wellness Sciences
montanezveragiclumad.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5812902/
0 Response to "Electronic Health Records Legal and Safety Issues Literature Review"
Postar um comentário