Return of Investment on Electronic Health Records

In a healthcare world that operates on stringent budgets and margins, we begin to see the need for a higher capacity healthcare delivery system. This in turn puts pressure on the healthcare organizations to ensure higher standards of patient care, and compliance with the reform provisions. However, these are the harsh realities of today’s healthcare environment, a setting in which value does not always equal quality. The use of technology can help to amend some of this by providing higher capacity care without compromising quality; this can be done with the use of such technology as electronic health records (EHRs). This paper will aim to address how EHRs influence healthcare today by expanding upon topics such as funding sources, reimbursement methods, economic factors, socioeconomic factors, business influences, and cost containment.

This case analysis of Stanford’s Hospital and Clinics (SHC) electronic medical record (EMR) system implementation will focus on how the healthcare organization focused on resolving a problem to meet regulatory pressures and responded to an opportunity to create operational efficiency, by capitalizing on the use of information technology to help reduce costs. We will discuss the organization’s IT problems, opportunities, and the alternatives available to address each. We will summarize an analysis of potential alternatives including the organization’s EMR system of choice and conclude with a recommendation to the Board on how to rollout the new system.

Possible benefits included positive patient outcomes as a result of improved quality of care, decreased medical errors, increase in financial revenue for organizations, better ability to conduct research, reduced cost of healthcare for patients, and an overall improvement in health for the general population (Menachemi & Collum, 2011). Disadvantages that were found in the review of literature included the initial cost to implement the electronic health record, continuing maintenance costs, and interruption in workflows that adds to the brief loss in productivity that occurs from healthcare providers having to learn a new system (Menachemi & Collum, 2011). There are also concerns about maintaining confidentiality (Menachemi & Collum,

Indicating the capital justification expenditures is vital for the return on investment of a Per Provider for Electronic Medical Record Implementation. Several key aspects are necessary to mention of the amount and type of expenditure, attainment of key decision criteria, and detailed financial analysis. Hospitals, clinics, and ambulatory care settings even have to indicate important capital expenditures. Factoring in risk is always crucial to consider as well as physician acceptance, competition from HCO’s and volume and market data increase. Health care organizations and universities should be maintaining increased ROI and consistently improving areas of risk and HCO’s aspects to be mentioned in further detail.

The Canadian health care system is certainly unique in its features…. Despite, the fact that the Canadian health care system is one of the most evolved in the world, it lacks a sense of an efficiency effective mission, in which would improve the quality and accessibility of health care in the management perspective. In this paper we will analyze current ineffective practices, and alternate methods; in regards to patient information records on a large scale. Thus, by the removal of the traditional paper records in regards to patient information will prove to be an in effective process, calling for a technological evolution of health information by the means of Computerized Patient Records. Through the process of EMR’s the desired target would be to lead Canadian health care towards a future with an integrated delivery system, in which connects health care under one unified system. furthermore, EMR’s will lead to a more effective and efficient patient care. And lastly the introduction of the system would lead to a more effective allocation of resources in health care, thus looking at the cost in relation to the benefit. Thus the introductions of Computerized Health Records on a large scale would relive the financial and derivative stress on the health care economics, and system, and in so doing the use of EMR’s would strengthen the nations productivity

However, whereas this seems to prove the importance of EHRs there is a need to understand the steps to quality healthcare and how EHRs enable hospitals provide these aspects. This paper will try to bring forth, the true picture of Electronic Health Records effectiveness. It is important to understand what an EHR is. According to this paper, this will take the following definition

With the advent of electronic health records (EHR’s) and The American Recovery Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, electronic health records have become main stream and a requirement for healthcare providers who treat Medicaid and Medicare patients. An electronic health record (EHR) is a digital version of a patient’s paper chart (Health IT, n.d.). EHRs are real-time, patient-centered records that make information available instantly and securely to authorized users. A portion of ARRA provides reimbursements to providers that have EHR’s that are certified for meaningful use. Certified EHR’s meet meaningful use requirements by meeting the government the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH)

Containing ninety participants, 36% of the respondents were hospital CIOs and I.T. executives, 19% from integrated delivery systems headquarters, 19% from group practices, and 27% from other facilities. Survey results pertained to patient health records, electronic health record (EHR) certification, and other IT issues in healthcare. According to the survey, “81% of respondents said their I.T. budgets will grow, with the most common prediction being growth of 5% to 10%. Implementing electronic health records was the No. 1 software investment priority for the coming year for hospitals, integrated delivery systems and group practices alike.” (CIOs Predict Future Trends, n.d) Interestingly, despite the economy at the time showing signs of a recession, “the vast majority of health care organizations expect their information technology budgets to grow during the next fiscal year, and this growth is driven primarily by a need to improve access to information for clinicians, the survey shows.” (CIOs Predict Future Trends, n.d) This improved access to information can be applied to patients as well, as the push towards cloud storage and record/test results access alleviates the need to wait, call, and require record searches from the physician’s staff. On the subject of streamlining access to the implementation to patient EHRs, 19% of

In February of 2009, the American Reinvestment & Recovery Act (ARRA) was passed to help the nation modernize its infrastructure. The “Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act” was then passed to address the barriers to the adoption of the electronic health record by healthcare organizations (Sandefer, Marc, & Kleeburg, 2015). There are many barriers for healthcare organizations to adopt the electronic health record. These include: “substantial cost, the perceived lack of financial return from investing in them, the technical and logistic challenges involved in installing,

Implementing to electronic medical records has many benefits such as reducing medical record errors, accuracy, having medical record access immediately, reducing medication errors and improving patient care. Monetary incentives are given to providers who demonstrate meaningful use. For those who do not, they face reduction in reimbursement amounts. “In 2017, reduction in reimbursement is 3%.” (National Center for Medical Records, n.d.)

The HIMSS Davies Award of Excellence is to serve as recognition for outstanding achievement for improved care outcomes and return on investment (ROI) through the use information technology in healthcare. The Davies Excellence Award promotes Electronic Health Record system (EHR) improvements not only in patient outcomes/engagement but also through sharing best practices and what was learned through its execution, system design, analytics, and management’s’ adoption . The award also recognizes the outstanding achievement of healthcare organizations that have employed health information technology to significantly improve patient outcomes while at the same time achieves a positive return on investment.

There is improvement in financial, administrative and management information, decrease in the duplication of the records, decrease in the repetitive lab tests, and reduction in the cost associated with hospital stays. A lot of money is saved by electronically storing and managing volumes of information [1]. ITAA believes that an industry-wide investment in IT of $18.1 billion would yield gross savings of greater than $120 billion dollars for the health care industry over a six-year period. [2] Many billing errors, coding inaccuracy have been reduced and as a result of this, there is enhancement in revenue.

As Harris Memorial Hospital and Harris Community Foundation aims to incorporate the Electronic Health Records (EHRs) in the system, being the Board of Trustees it is your imperative to have complete knowledge about the justification of soft costs and the financial benefits associated with the incorporation of EHRs. Hence, there is a requirement for EHR investment, I would like to explain the steps for justification of ROI soft return with an example and the capital acquisition required to support. This will eventually help you track the appropriate methods in expanding the overall potential of implementing EHRs.

It can overall increase productivity and profit in the long-term. For instance, my workplace instills usage of electronic medical records for new and current patients for efficiency, productivity, and accuracy for the long-term of patients dental x-rays and health history. The costs involved are considerable and hard to calculate depending on the fees and licensing. According to, (Health Resources and Services Administration, 2016), a persistent problem is demonstrating a return on investment from an (EHR) implementation is often times challenging and may be even more difficult for smaller practices. The cost and effort involved from staff and management is difficult, but necessary to carry out productivity for implementation of (EHR). Every company practice is different and every practice must adapt to changes of implementing (EMR) for the duration of patient accuracy. Aside from the challenges, cost, and effort of implementing (EMR)’s in health care organizations, there is a desire to generate a return on investment (ROI) from them.

Electronic health records (EHR’s) have many advantages, but there are plenty of disadvantages. EHR’s were created to manage the many aspects of healthcare information. Medical professionals use them daily and most would feel lost without it. Healthcare organizations were encouraged to adopt EHR’s in 2009 due to the fact that a bill passed known as The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act). “The HITECH Act outlines criteria to achieve “meaningful use” of certified electronic records. These criteria must be met in order for providers to receive financial incentives to promote adoption of EHRs as an integral part of their daily practice”, (Conrad, Hanson, Hasenau & Stocker-Schneider, 2012).