Most hospitals still not using electronic health records, study shows

Hospitals across the country cling to low-tech record keeping systems, despite widespread calls for new technology. A new study released early by the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine yesterday, found a remarkably low adoption rate of comprehensive electronic health records across U.S. hospitals.

The Obama administration argues that electronic health records can save money and improve care. This year’s stimulus package signed by the president on Feb. 17 included $19 billion for health information technology such as electronic health records. According to the authors of the NEJM study—which includes an Obama health care advisor who is now the administration’s coordinator of health care technology—they’ll need financial assistance to entice hospitals to implement the systems.

While we’ve previously reported that only about 20 to 25 percent of hospitals and 15 to 20 percent of doctors now use such systems, the NEJM study tried to define just what kind of electronic health records hospitals have, and estimated that less than 2 percent of hospitals have comprehensive electronic health records. And while a majority of hospitals use some form of electronic record keeping—more than 75 percent have reported adopting electronic laboratory and radiologic reporting systems, for example—only 8 to 12 percent even meet a definition of having a basic electronic health record system in place.

The authors define a basic system as one that has a minimum of eight critical functions used in at least one major clinical unit, while a comprehensive system is defined by 24 functions in every major unit. The most commonly cited reason for not instituting electronic record keeping systems was lack of funds, followed by maintenance costs, physician resistance, unclear return on investment, and lack of staff expertise.

The authors excluded federal hospitals run by the Veterans Health Administration, which they note have successfully implemented electronic record keeping and have improved the quality of care dramatically. They conclude, “from a policy perspective, our data suggest that rewarding hospitals—especially financially vulnerable ones—for using health information technology may play a central role in a comprehensive approach to stimulating the spread of hospital electronics-record systems."

—Kevin McCarthy, associate editor

For more on electronic health records, see the Consumers Union blog, PrescriptionforChange.org.

Comments

[tommy]

The most commonly cited reason for not instituting electronic record keeping systems was lack of funds, followed by maintenance costs, physician resistance, unclear return on investment, and lack of staff expertise.