Predicting Readmissions, Longitudinal Record, and Physicians’ Time

Posted on May 12, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the 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 and John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Here’s a quick look around the Twittersphere and a few topics that stood out to me that I think might be of interest to you.

I’ve been following algorithms like this for a while and they’re really starting to come into their own. This type of predictive technology or predictive analytics if you prefer is going to really change how we manage patients in a hospital. If done right, it can help us become proactive instead of reactive. This will require us to change a lot of processes though.

Is a longitudinal health record possible in any format? I’m beginning to think that it’s a pipe dream that will never happen. At least not with our current documentation requirements.

I find time studies like these very interesting. However, the thing I hate about them is that we don’t have a time study from before implementing EHR software so we could compare how a physician used their time before EHR and after. No doubt over 50% of their time being spent on documentation and not face-to-face with the patient feels bad. However, how far off was this from where we were in the paper world?

Looking at the chart, prescription refills can be faster in an EHR. Secure messages can be faster with an EHR since you’re not playing phone tag which was the process before secure messages. Telephone encounters were likely the same. That leaves just the progress notes as the one thing that could be more time consuming in an EHR than the paper chart. How much more is the real question. Paper chart progress notes weren’t all that fast either. That’s why stacks of paper charts that weren’t completed were always sitting on physicians’ desks.

I guess the core question I would ask is, “Are EHRs the reason doctors hate medicine, or are the ongoing regulations and requirements that have been heaped on doctors the real problem?” My guess is that all this documentation overheard that’s being required of doctors was a problem in the paper world, but has been exacerbated in the EHR world. What do you think?