The Benefits of Electronic Health Records
Recent studies show that they could save you time, keep you healthier, and improve medical research.
Thanks to a large influx of stimulus
spending, a debate over electronic health records (EHRs) has been bubbling through newspages and blogs. Some people are concerned about privacy, others are worried
that EHRs will help the government will take over healthcare. But few have focused on the
potential benefits to patients.
Here’s a smattering of recent studies highlighting how
electronic health records might help our costly and overburdened health system:
A study I wrote
about earlier last month found that hospitals with the most effective
electronic medical record systems had healthier patients–they saw fewer
deaths and complications–and lower bills.
This story is only available to subscribers.
Don’t settle for half the story.
Get paywall-free access to technology news for the here and now.
Subscribe now
Already a subscriber?
Sign in
You’ve read all your free stories.
MIT Technology Review provides an
intelligent and independent filter for the
flood of information about technology.
Subscribe now
Already a subscriber?
Sign in
Electronic systems also seem to improve preventative
medicine by boosting screening. A study from Harvard Medical School found that
patients who were sent reminders for colorectal cancer screenings, which were
generated from electronic medical data, were more likely to get themselves screened.
Electronic reminders sent to physicians had no effect on screening rates, suggesting
that patients may be an untapped resource in their own preventative healthcare.
A third study points to the potential research benefits of
electronic medical records, something that some of the physicians and researchers I
have spoken with are particularly excited about. According to the research, published
in the British Medical Journal, statistical analysis of electronic medical
record databases mimics results of clinical trials, predicting which drugs work
best. This kind of data wouldn’t replace clinical trials, of course. But scientists
say EMRs could be used to supplement clinical trial data, to look at a drug’s
effectiveness in a more diverse population, for example. Details of the study
are described in a release
from the University of Pennsylvania:
[Richard Tannen, Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and his] team selected six previously performed randomized trials with 17
measured outcomes and compared them to study data from an electronic database
– the UK general practice research database (GPRD), which included the medical
records of roughly 8 million patients. Treatment efficacy was determined by the
prevalence of cardiovascular outcomes, such as stroke, heart attack and death.
After using standard biostatistical methods to adjust for differences in the
treated and untreated groups in the analysis of the database information,
Tannen found that there were no differences in the database outcomes compared
to randomized clinical trials in nine out of 17 outcomes.
In the other eight outcomes, Tannen’s group used an additional new
biostatistical approach they discovered that controlled for differences between
the treated and untreated groups prior to the time the study began. By using
the new biostatistical method instead of the standard approach, the researchers
showed there were no differences between the outcomes in the EMR database study
compared to the randomized clinical trials.
I go to a large medical practice in Boston that has been one
of the pioneers in electronic medical records, and I personally find it very
useful. Different doctors have access to my information, whether I’m visiting the
Cambridge or Boston location. And I can look at my own health data online–seeing
your weight, cholesterol and blood pressure measurements plotted out over time
is a sure impetus to keep them in check.
