Advertisement

Featured in NEJM Journal Watch: Is Electronic Charting Less Efficient Than Paper Charting? — Physician’s First Watch

Medical News |
June 3, 2014

Featured in NEJM Journal Watch: Is Electronic Charting Less Efficient Than Paper Charting?

By the NEJM Journal Watch Editors

Operational performance was similar before and after computerization at 23 community emergency departments. The findings appear in the Annals of Emergency Medicine.

Reader Comments (7)

Jay Davis MD Physician, Family Medicine/General Practice, College Health Service

Word processors replaced the typewriter without any governmental incentive or coercion, because--quite simply--for a minimal investment in effort, a user got a huge benefit.

An EMR that gives that kind of advantage will be adopted rapidly and voluntarily. Need I say more?

James Keyes, BSc Other, Retired

1. The screen becomes the center of attention
2. The keyboard is touched more than the patient
3. Verbal exchanges are decreased
4. However, a fine post-visit report is handed to the pt.
One patient's viewpoint!

sinuani gidon m.d Physician, Obstetrics/Gynecology

there are no good enough emr
but stile the emr is better

Lisa Strober Physician, Psychiatry, private office

individual, personal scribes who are very computer savy would go a long way toward dealing with issues of data entry into electronic charts, freeing up the doctor to do what he or she does best. Who pays for the scribe, that is the question.

Jeanne Fabian Engel, DO Physician, Hospital Medicine, locums

Electronic xharting for inpatients by hospitalists definitely requires more time and effort. Paper charting can be done on the spot. EMR requires oftentimes taking notes and then finding and logging on to a computer as well as difficulties at time maneuvering around the system!

Jeffrey Buckman, MD Physician, Internal Medicine, Private Practice

Interestingly, that this is not publicized: as we suspected, implementation of EHRs would not improve outcomes.

Nancy Steiner, MD Physician, Pediatric Subspecialty

appreciate the NEJM JOUrnal Watch

Your Comment

(will not be published)

Filtered HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Do you have any conflict of interest to disclose?
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Vertical Tabs

* Required

Reader comments are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. We ask that you keep your remarks to a reasonable length, and we reserve the right to withhold publication of remarks that do not meet this standard.

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement