Free Hospital EMR and EHR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to Hospital EMR and EHR for FREE!

How Do You See Emerging Tech Like AI and Machine Learning Improving Efficiency in Clinical Settings?

Posted on April 12, 2018 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

The title of this post was the question that Samsung Healthcare posted to me:

Here was my knee jerk response:

At least a couple people strongly agreed including this one:

AJ is right that the tech is nearly there to do all of this. I suggested that they key is going to be the person that packages it the right way.

This is a lesson we all learned from the iPhone. Very few things within the iPhone were unique and new. It was how Apple packaged all of the components that made it special. I think it’s going to play out the same when it comes to physician documentation. All of the NLP, Voice Recognition, Machine Learning, and AI tools are out there. Everyone will have access to them, but how they’re packaged is going to make all the difference.

All of that said, I don’t see this too far off. We’re already starting to see elements of it, but the entrenched players will have a hard time doing this. They’re already getting rich off of their existing products, so they’ll continue to make incremental improvements. Some startup company is going to come along and package this all the right way and win.

Plus, let’s be clear that one of the biggest parts of the packaging will be how it transitions users from the old way of thinking to a new approach. However, once the doctor sees it in action, they’ll see it as magical. Compared to the forms they’re doing today, it will be magical.

Who do you see offering this? Are any of the EHR vendors brave enough to do this? It’s so badly needed by so many.

How Rampant is Double Documentation in EHRs?

Posted on January 18, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.


This tweet inspired me to talk about the problem of double documentation in an EHR. This is a massive problem for many organizations. Unfortunately, when you look at Many EHR workflows they do require double documentation. Sometimes this is thanks to regulations like meaningful use. Other times it’s medical billing requirements that necessitate double documentation. In other cases patient safety and quality of care requires something to be documented twice.

Of course, when I say that these things “necessitate” and “require” double documentation that might not be completely accurate. Medical billing, patient safety, and quality of care don’t require double documentation (with a few well known exceptions like verifying allergies). Instead, it’s the EHR workflow that requires something be documented twice in order for you to bill at the highest levels or in order for the EHR to later make the right information available to you at a later time as part of a patient safety or quality of care effort.

The reality is that many EHR workflows are constrained in a way that doctors and other medical staff our doing double work. If you’ve ever been in the doctors or nurses shoes, you know how irritating double entry can be in a work environment. On the other hand, purging the double work can be a great way to improve your employee’s work life.

Turns out that patients have the same problem. I don’t know how many thousands of people over the years have complained about having to fill out the same health forms over and over. Turns out that patients don’t like the double entry and more than the doctors and nurses.

This post also reminds me of my doctor friend who taught me about how the EMR perpetuates misinformation. When you start double entering something, that makes that issue twice as complex to track and update.

Personally, I’ve found two types of double documentation. The first is when poorly implemented processes require double documentation. If multiple departments within the same organization were communicating more effectively, then this wouldn’t happen. The fix to this problem is not easy, but can be solved if the right leader brings together the various departments to help everyone really understand and address the problem.

The second situation is where the EHR interface doesn’t allow a specific workflow and so the only way to satisfy your internal requirements is to double document. This is a much more challenging siuation to solve. The only solution I’ve found is to become deep partners with your EHR vendor so that you can effectively communicate the problem and convince them to add your requirement to their long list of EHR product enhancements. This can be even more effective if you’re connected to other customers of your EHR vendor and you can leverage them as a second voice for why the problem needs to be solved. No doubt there is power in numbers when influencing changes in an EHR.

If you’re dealing with the challenge of double documentation, what are you doing to combat it? What solutions are available to help make this less of an issue?

Security Issues of Paper Medical Records and Faxes

Posted on July 28, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I loved this tweet. It’s a great reminder that far too often when we look at EHR Implementations we compare it against a world that is 100% and 100% efficient. This is an unfair comparison. Instead of comparing EHR against the perfect world, we need to compare EHR to the alternative. In most cases, we should be comparing the EHR world to the paper chart world. Doing so makes all the difference.

I’ve written previously about this concept when I wrote, It’s Not Like Paper Charts Were Fast. In that instance I was comparing the speed of EHR documentation with paper chart documentation. They’re much closer than we like to remember. In fact, in many cases EHR documentation is much faster than paper charts. Although, critics of EHR prefer to compare the speed of EHR to an automatic documentation world. Unfortunately, the automatic documentation world is still a fantasy. Hopefully that dream eventually comes true.

As the tweet above mentions, the same could be applied to security. No doubt there are security challenges in an EHR world. However, there were and are security challenges with paper charts and faxes as well. For example, there was no good way to audit who accessed a paper chart. That’s not an issue in an EHR world. I could go on and on, but you get the idea.

When evaluating EHR, let’s always remember to compare it to the alternative and not the perfect world that really doesn’t exist.