Government Technology - February 2008 - (Page 36)

state need to engage in encouraging changes in particular areas, whether that be statutory, regulatory, or otherwise, both at the state and federal level to ensure that people and their information is protected.” Risks and Rewards In October 2007, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, a British agency responsible for tax collection and dispensing a variety of benefits, lost two computer disks. Those disks contained the personal information of 25 million Britons, such as names, addresses, even insurance and bank data. All British families with a child age 16 or younger had some information contained on the disks. This sort of nightmare security breach clouds the future of electronic health records in the United States. EHRs and PHRs offer tremendous promise — reducing expenses, cutting medical errors, boosting overall efficiency. But does the promise of these systems make the risk worth it? Many in the industry say yes, but they caution that extreme care must be taken. “Folks with chronic conditions that are used to managing their diabetes, for instance, want to manage it better,” said Robert “Rim” Cothren, chief scientist for Northrop Grumman. “They know they have hypertension, and they will for the rest of their life, and they are interested in managing it better. That’s a very active group of people that, given better information, really will manage their disease better. [Improved medical records] will have a positive impact on the cost of their health care and their own general health.” The key to making EHRs a reality, and PHRs to a degree, is making the systems work together. Cothren echoed the calls for standardizing electronic health data. The challenge, he said, is not dealing with a lack of standards, but managing the more than 1,000 standards that exist now. Dr. David Donnersberger, chief resident at Evanston Northwestern Healthcare in Evanston, Ill., said his office has moved to the exclusive use of EHRs, anticipating the rewards his patients will reap outweigh the risks of digital health data. Donnersberger argues that if his bank account data can be FEB_08 “ FOLKS WITH CHRONIC CONDITIONS THAT ARE USED TO MANAGING THEIR DIABETES, FOR INSTANCE, WANT TO MANAGE IT BETTER. Robert “Rim” Cothren, chief scientist, Northrop Grumman ” managed electronically, his health data shouldn’t be any different. “I think EHRs are fantastic. They hold terrific promise for the patient and the physician. Interoperability is the Holy Grail of electronic health records,” Donrds,” nersberger said. “If you go to H Honolulu and break your hip, your doctor in Honolulu can get on the Internet and get your records from Sarasota. The promise is the exchange of information between healthcare providers for patients — geography unaffected, location nonspecific.” Furthermore, he argues, EHRs and PHRs can do things like reduce costs, eliminate duplicate tests and prevent allergic reactions by making ER physicians instantly aware of a patient’s history. Another reason advocates promote the importance of the technology is because the health-care industry is currently crippled by obsolescence and HIPAA regulations. Tom Dorsett, president of health-care solutions for Vemics Inc., said his company has launched what it claims is the world’s first HIPAA-compliant, electronic medical records transport application in a product called iMedicor. Dorsett said iMedicor is similar to an e-mail application, except it’s completely secure and operates on a closed network. This allows physicians to confidentially exchange patient data with need-to-know colleagues. Dorsett said the health-care industry has been “bottlenecked by HIPAA,” causing the industry to lag behind. “Can you imagine not having e-mail?” he said. “That’s really what health care has faced. We’ve created a driver that allows just about any electronic medical records system to interface with our portal. In lieu of taking a document out and faxing it over, they can select the document within their EHR and click ‘print’ and it will, through a special driver, drop that document into iMedicor. They select their contact and hit ‘send,’ and the other physician has access to that.” The case for EHRs might seem open and shut — but not everyone is convinced. There are some physicians who feel the entire electronic health data industry, including EHRs and PHRs, has not matured to the point that widespread adoption makes sense. And skeptics are armed with examples to back up their doubts, as it seems almost daily a newspaper reports on a gaping security flaw that has led to the loss of millions of pieces of personal information. Dr. Demitri Adarmes is a practicing physician in Olympia, Wash., and is board certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Adarmes steadfastly refuses to move to EHRs because he believes the standards need to be in place before adoption, not after. Additionally Adarmes said that should a physician become involved in litigation, digital data may not be sufficient. “I’m pretty familiar with EHRs,” he said. “As part of my training I worked with them at the VA hospitals and several of the other university hospitals [with internal EHR systems] where I did my training. Once I finished the training, though, I went back to charts. The main reason is I do a lot of medical legal work. So when papers go to court, they want a primary source.” 36 http://www.govtech.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Government Technology - February 2008

Government Technology - February 2008 Contents Point of View Big Picture The Last Mile On the Screen Products Four Questions for... CSI Effect Bad Medicine Making Health Care Personal Cashing In GIS for Less Nabbing Speedsters First Person: Records Management Chatter Box Oregon Data Centers Go Green Products Two Cents Spectrum Up Close Personal Computing signal:noise Government Solutions - Spring 2008 Power Play Double Duty Cleaning House Twice Prepared Smart Move The Path to Success Foundation for Service

Government Technology - February 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.