Electronic Health Records: Availability and Portability Vs. Privacy

Electronic Health Records: Availability and Portability Vs. Privacy

by Ricky Ocampo RN

Today's technological advances are out-pacing what we're able to expect or comprehend, and there are several aspects of today’s life and society that benefit greatly from this factor. However, there are several thinkers who stand against some of the consequences—or benefits (subject to perception)—that such technological advances provide. The Internet, for instance, is the pedestal for most of today's technology, and judging by how dependent the world has become  on its provisions, it's very likely that businesses, companies, and the world's industrial sector in general will be the one that has to bend and adapt, and not the other way around. The spread of information is one of such vital benefits the Internet provides, but such spread of information is sometimes at the costs of both private and government secrets and information, thus not all thinkers are on-board with this aspect of online information storage. Inevitably, the heavy shift from conventional file storage to online or “cloud” storage is a step also being taken by many medical institutions, but this step also comes with the risks of leaked or stolen information that could compromise the privacy of patients. In contrast of such risks and consequences, adapting such method of information storage can make patient identification, diagnostics, and information transfer considerably more efficient that the conventional method will ever be able to, thus it becomes very difficult to ignore these advantageous factors. This doesn't stop several thinkers from arguing the controversy, providing several standpoints and perceptions within their own premises. Generally, as already established, the risks and potential hazards/consequences aren't strong enough premises to not adapt the method and miss out on several advantages.

The Case for Availability and Portability

            Availability and portability would appear as mere, unimportant factors until one considers the fact that physical newspapers are practically dragging to a slow death, and being replaced by mobile devices and Internet-provided news and information (Greenslade, 2014). Generally, people arguing for the use of electronic health records (EHR) will find that they have an easier time finding premises to support their claims than those who argue against them. In Electronic Medical Records System it's expressed that “the availability of electronic data permits instant, sophisticated analysis of patient data. Moreover, the EMR system enables enhanced analysis of patient data by providing access to reference databases for diagnosis, procedures and medication” (Evans, 1999). Furthermore, Arthur and medical researcher, Linda Thede, expressed in Informatics: Electronic Health Records: A Boon or Privacy Nightmare that “there have been cases where paper medical records, especially parts of them, have disappeared” (Thede, 2010), a scenario nearly impossible and very abnormal to find in EHRs.

The Case for Privacy

            Researcher and author Lauren Bair Jacques, in Electronic Health Records and Respect for Patient Privacy: A Prescription for Compatibility expressed that “EHRs and patient privacy are compatible and may peacefully coexist” (Jacques, 2010), and he provides several premises to back his claim. For one, he mentions that presidential administrations such as President Clinton or President George W. Bush endorsed the idea of EHRs because the resource appear to fall in line with their overall goal which is to improve and strengthen the American healthcare system (goal). He also mentions that the establishment of government agencies and government-regulated acts such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which was instated as means for “improving portability and continuity of health insurance coverage in the group and individual markets; combating waste, fraud, and abuse in health insurance and health care delivery; promoting the use of medical savings accounts; improving access to long-term care services and coverage; and simplifying the administration of health insurance” (place). But HIPAA also contains several aspects that protect patients' information both from doctors and other institutions. According to the US Health and Human Services (HHS), the HIPAA Privacy Rule “establishes national standards to protect individuals' medical records and other personal health information and applies to health plans, health care clearinghouses, and those health care providers that conduct certain health care transactions electronically” (Jacques, 2010). Generally, one can easily conclude that several safety precautions have been taken to protect patients' information and ensure fairness, thus the arguments based solely on the factor of privacy don't have very solid grounds to stand on.

The Writer's Opinion

            Contrary to the premises and concerns of thinkers arguing against the use of EMRs, the benefits of using EMRs appear nearly endless. For one, supporting a method that heavily involves the use of papers and other resources that are very costly to the environment and overall health of nature and life is a somewhat ironic argument for any health or medical expert to make.   The conventional information storage system involves typically frustrating goose chases of information about patients—information that aren't usually available in hand, meaning that a doctor would have to call the previous doctors or medical facilities of his/her patients to request for specific information. Authors Marcia Stanhope and Jeannette Lancaster, in Public Health Nursing Population-Centered Health Care in the Community, mention that “an innovative use of the electronic health record to meet the needs of the public health workforce is the ability to embed reminders or guidelines within the EHR” (Stanhope & Lancaster, 2013); such a resource would make tracking down vital details and information much easier. Privacy generally appears to be the only concern of most, but with government regulations and insurance measures, it can hardly be said to be a solid factor.

Conclusion

            In conclusion, as Linda Thede provides, “although Americans are concerned about the privacy of medical records, survey data shows that despite this concern, the majority of Americans are aware of the benefits of electronic records and believe that they outweigh privacy concerns” (Stanhope & Lancaster, 2013); one would really have to search for solid premises as to why EHRs aren't a resourceful approach, and one would really have to nitpick at unsubstantial details to gather any attention. Inevitably, such search will drag to a frustrating end as one is forced to acknowledge that EHRs are only going to become more integrated into healthcare as the world continues to advance technologically.

References

Greenslade, R. (2014, July 11). Latest ABCs show newspaper market decline running at 8% a      year. Retrieved October 22, 2015, from         http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/jul/11/abcs-national-newspapers

Evans, J. A. (1999). U.S. Patent No. 5,924,074. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark       Office.

Thede, L. (2010). Informatics: Electronic Health Records: A Boon or Privacy Nightmare? OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 15(2).

Jacques, L. B. (2010). Electronic health records and respect for patient privacy: A prescription      for compatibility. Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L., 13, 441.

Stanhope, M., & Lancaster, J. (2013). Public Health Nursing-Revised Reprint: Population-            Centered Health Care in the Community. Elsevier Health Sciences.