Electronic health records and medical records seem like linguistic variations of the same word. But, the change in one word accounts for a very sharp distinction.
What is an EMR?
Electronic medical records are digital versions of a patient’s medical details encompassing his treatment history, demographic information, allergies, vaccinations, lab results, and other information covered through visits. Billing and insurance information might also be included.
EMRs are maintained by a single medical provider to track the patient’s data so that all updates can be monitored, and the system can run smoothly to improve the overall quality of care for patients.
What is an EHR?
Electronic Health records cover the same things (treatment histories and more) but at a broader scope. These records are not restricted to a single medical provider but extend to multiple providers with which the patient has engaged (for instance, laboratories or other clinics).
The EHRs are not just there to store and track the patient’s details. But they are to share them and contribute to improving the overall healthcare system.
Key Difference Between EHR and EMR
In a Venn diagram, EMRs would be subset circles inside EHRs.
- While EMRs cover a patient’s details associated with one single medical provider, EHRs go beyond a particular healthcare organization and provide a holistic view of a patient’s medical care.
- EHRs have a lot more information than EMRs because they are more comprehensive.
- Another difference is that EHRs are designed in a way that allows them to be easily accessed by multiple providers (after passing the necessary verification). The data can be shared and used by local and international laboratories, specialists, pharmacies, etc. EMRs, on the other hand, are strictly accessible by the specific medical provider that creates them.
Key Benefits of EHR and EMR
The move from manual filekeeping to electronic records has made things very easy. Both EMRs and EHRs have multiple collective advantages:
- It saves time and energy because employees do not need to review hundreds of papers to find their desired records. Now, things are at the disposal of one click.
- Human error (due to handwriting or misreading) is minimized, so there are fewer mistakes.
- With good security, extra protection is provided to the patient’s records.
EMRs are all collected in one place under the supervision of authorized individuals. This helps keep track of patient activity especially in relatively more minor clinics, thereby improving healthcare quality.
Records are backed up by extra security and can only be retrieved upon the patient’s demand.
EHRs, on the other hand, enable a process where the collective healthcare system works together to care for the patients. Hospitals can save time verifying records. Medical providers can easily tally the patient’s history with other medical providers.
For example, in a state of emergency, where a patient is brought to the hospital in an unconscious state and cannot attest to his details (past treatments, allergies), then his EHRs will be shared by his primary health provider.
Moreover, there is no need for duplicate tests to be run by the hospital if another laboratory has already done them. This saves time and resources.
Through EHRs, a patient can access his medical details 24/7 and track changes in his health accordingly. As per a survey by Pew Trusts about 81% want EHRs to be wholly incorporated into the healthcare system so that they can actively take charge of their well-being.
Drawbacks of EHR & EMR
Both EHRs and EMRs have some collective drawbacks: They are expensive to administer. The software, hardware, and training required can be costly. For smaller practices, outsourcing medical billing services or acquiring medical billing audit services regularly can help manage these financial and operational demands, making the transition more feasible.
Like all hardware, EHR systems can crash or malfunction, though reputable systems offer robust safety features. Data breaches are a potential risk if security is not tightened.
With EMRs, a significant drawback is limited accessibility, as other providers cannot access them, which may hinder patient coordination. EHRs also come with notable disadvantages: There are security concerns, with patient data potentially susceptible to theft. A comprehensive record can lead to data overload, which may be challenging to manage.
Conclusion
In summary, while both EMR vs EHR have modernized record-keeping, they serve distinct purposes. EMRs focus on maintaining a patient’s medical details within a single provider, enhancing the quality of care within that setting. EHRs extend beyond individual providers, enabling seamless sharing of information across healthcare systems, benefiting patients and medical professionals alike. Both systems improve efficiency, minimize errors, and boost data security. However, they also come with costs and data management challenges. Choosing between EMRs and EHRs ultimately depends on the scope of care and needs of each practice, especially when considering factors like coordination and accessibility.