The advent of improved technologies coupled with the higher demand for healthcare services has called for urgent needs for better methods in which organizations handle and manage information systems. This is necessary not only for improved care for patients but also for the sake of boosting the experience of employees in that particular organization.
Information Technology
Transferring a hospital information system from interfaced mode to an integrated system is a procedure that requires concerted effort and adequate resources. For instance, the finance and administrative departments in a healthcare unit ought to work hand in hand for this transformation to be realized (Faulkner, 2009). The information technology if well-entrenched into a healthcare system will automatically lead to low operational costs because most departments will be automated reducing the cost of human resource input.
One of the tricky challenges being encountered by many organizations today is managing as well as harmonizing the continuous information flow in and out of the organization. The volume of information keeps on increasing and this has posed an even greater challenge. This paper is an overview of why healthcare organizations should move from an interfaced system to an integrated system of information management, the proposed solutions, and the anticipated outcomes.
Information technology in healthcare provides a round framework that helps to give a proper description to the thorough management of information related to health. At the same time, there should be a safe and friendly exchange of this vital information between consumers, those who manage healthcare organizations, the government, insurance companies, and quality control managers. The interfaced system has been found to be inadequate to handle bulky information and again such a system is considered to be user-unfriendly. According to Morris, Savelyich, Avery, Cantrill, and Sheikh (2005), an integrated information system in healthcare is seen as the most vibrant tool of taking healthcare service to another level. The quality, as well as effective delivery of healthcare services, cannot be possible with a mere interfaced system.
There are several workable arguments that have been put forward favoring the adoption and implementation of integrated systems against interfaced information systems. Patton and Gardner (1999) observe that the quality of healthcare is likely to be better in an integrated system. This is possible due to the fact that a well-managed information base will in the end reduce or completely eliminate common medical errors usually experienced with interlaced systems. A huge benefit will also go towards the consumers of this well-managed information. Patients will have to spend less on their medical bills. Moreover, administering healthcare organizations with integrated information systems will lead to improved efficiency and effectiveness. This will in turn give better returns to the organization (Reilly 2003).
Interfaced information systems experience a lot of delays and time-wasting associated with extreme paperwork. When an organization puts so much of its information on hard copy, there is a likely chance that retrieving, sharing, and transferring of these pieces of information will be cumbersome. Too much paperwork is reduced with integrated systems.
Prompt service delivery to patients will again broaden accessibility to affordable medical services. Gans, Kralewski, Hammons, and Dowd (2005) notes that integrated information systems will also result in many gains to the general public which include detection of communicable diseases and outbreaks in advance and better follow-up and management of long term illnesses. These public benefits cannot be realized when information systems are interfaced. In addition to this public importance, healthcare organizations that have embraced an integrated approach to information also find it easier to evaluate their healthcare provision owing to the fact different information packages can be pooled together, compared, and analyzed for decision making (Kensaku, Fellow1, Caitlin, and Andrew, 2005).
The application of electronic systems in the diagnosis and treatment of ailments in healthcare organizations is one way of ensuring that these organizations avail important information needed by patients for decision making. In addition to this, healthcare units will save millions of dollars every year due to proper and timely planning. However, the main constraint to the enactment and implementation of an integrated system of information is cost. The adoption of this technology requires huge sums of capital investment. This is discouraging many players in the healthcare sector (Weiner, et al 2007). In spite of this, patients will have to enjoy improved health standards. Hospitals will have to invest heavily to implement the integrated approach and accrue higher returns in the long term.
The interfaced system makes use of medical records which are done manually therefore prone to human errors. On the other hand, electronic medical records can alleviate a multitude of errors in particular those related to prevention, prescription, laboratory tests, and methodologies (Anon, 2001). Overall, integrated systems can save healthcare organizations in terms of running costs and other overheads. For instance, the wrong prescription of drugs leads to wastage and possible loss of life by patients.
The ease with which operations can be carried out at healthcare facilities becomes more evident as interface systems are gradually replaced with integrated systems. All the hospital branches can share patient information from any other point as opposed to the central point when the interface system is used. Better still; patients can acquire their health information at any healthcare site (Patrick 2001). This will indeed reduce some hidden costs to the healthcare providers in a number of ways. There will be no longer working sessions due to the large numbers of patients to be attended to. Shorter working hours for employees will mean that the organization will spend less amount of money on their paychecks. Although stakeholders in healthcare provision are still struggling to introduce this new method of receiving, storing, and retrieving information, most of them have so far complied and are reaping the benefits.
Reports which are written by hand and other manual records alongside shorthand notes, which cannot be interpreted by everybody as well as illegible handwriting are some of the difficulties employees and management staff go through when the interfaced system is in place (Ross, 2005). All these weaknesses put together lead to gross errors and damages. Healthcare units end up losing so much in terms of resource utilization and profitability. In cases patients sustain serious injuries due to wrong diagnosis and treatment, hospitals reputations are damaged and become the center of public outcry. The promises and expectations in the field of healthcare are great even as we enter the twenty-first century.
At the same time, the challenges facing Medicare are also great. With the invention, growth, and development of new technologies and therapies, healthcare organizations that do not integrate information technology into their systems may find it extremely difficult to stay put in this dynamic world (William, 2006). Indeed, medicine has to go through the same pace of technological change which other industries have had to undergo. This is important for these healthcare units to remain viable. The use of computers and apparatus that use computer knowledge will be central to the survival of healthcare systems. Some constraints need to be ironed out before integratedan approach a to healthcare plan can be put into full use. For patients, they would need to be assured of their privacy now that information on medical records would be accessed from any point. However, this cannot be a barrier to healthcare providers to avoid shifting information systems from interface to integrated system. There is an equally great benefit in the sense that should these healthcare organizations manage information data with competence, patients will not only develop trust and confidence in them but also have high reputation of these institutions. This is a positive move which will translate into an institution’s profitability and hence sustainability (Sittig et al 2006).
It is evident that healthcare providers who fail to comply with this new technology will not be able to compete favorably with those already implementing the integrated approach. They will in turn lose out on the market share and eventually out of business.
A report by a UK based firm in 1998 described health informatics as one area where innovation has taken root. Organizations are therefore required to keep in pace with this fast growth rate (Anon, 2006).The cost effectiveness of an integrated system cannot be ignored either. Slower systems coupled with loss of data can cause organizations to lose so much in terms of resource deployment and utilization alongside increasing the cost of overheads. It has also been considered safe for healthcare institutions to adopt integrated systems over interface. Accidents and injuries associated with wrong diagnosis and invalid data is rife with interface information systems. In the end, healthcare providers incur additional operational costs in handling emergencies and at times compensation packages for patients who strongly feel that they were not diagnosed and treated appropriately (Anon, 2006).
Conclusion
Although there is an argument by healthcare providers that changing from an interfaced system to an integrated one is not cost effective, the overall benefits both to these institutions as well as patients cannot be overlooked. The main barrier lies within setting up the infrastructural requirements for an integrated system which requires heavy capital investment. However, once the system has been put in place, the medical providers will start reaping the benefits which include but not limited to efficiency and effective service delivery, reduced labor costs due to automated system, competitive advantage against other providers who still use interfaced systems and expeditious management of information base of healthcare organizations which will in turn facilitate prompt decision making for the institution. Moreover, employees in integrated systems will gain better experience in their work thereby increasing their output per individual.
Besides, healthcare needs have continued to rise with time. There are more patients in hospital queues everyday waiting to be attended to. Similarly, patients are also in dire need of better healthcare schemes and programs which will guarantee them value for their money. This will not be possible with interfaced systems which are often slow, full of human errors, and cumbersome to interpret. Therefore, healthcare informatics should be utilized at this point in time. The outlook will also be good because handling large number of patients within a very short period of time will translate into increased revenue by providers.
References
Anon. (2001). Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. New York: The National Academies Press
Anon. (2006). Preventing Medication Errors. The National Academies Press. Web.
David, W. Bates, MD, et al. (1998). Effect of Computerized Physician Order Entry and a Team Intervention on Prevention of Serious Medication Errors. JAMA 280 (15): 1311–1316.
Faulkner, A. (2009). Medical Technology into Healthcare and Society: sociology of Devices, Innovation and Governance. Palgrave: Macmillan Publishers
Gans, D, Kralewski J, Hammons T, Dowd, B. (2005). Medical groups’ adoption of electronic health records and information systems. Health affairs (Project Hope) 24 (5): 1323–1333.
Kensaku, K. Fellow1, Caitlin A H. E. Andrew B. David F.L. (2005). Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. British Medical Journal 330: 765–768.
Morris, B S P Savelyich, A J Avery, J A Cantrill and A Sheikh (2005). Patient safety features of clinical computer systems: questionnaire survey of GP views. Quality and Safety in Health Care 14 (3): 164–168.
Patton, G.A; Gardner R.M. (1999). Medical Informatics Education – The University of Utah Experience. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 6 (6): 457–465.
Patrick, P. et al. (2007). Technological Iatrogenesis: New risks force heightened management awareness. Journal of Healthcare Risk Management 27 (4):19–24.
Ross K. (2005). Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry Systems in Facilitating Medication Errors. JAMA 293 (10): 1197–1203.
Reilly, E.D. (2003). Milestones in Computer Science and Information Technology. Greenwood Press
Sittig, Dean F; Ash, Joan S; Ledley, Robert S (2006). The story behind the development of the first whole-body computerized tomography scanner as told by Robert S. Ledley. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA 13 (5): pp. 465–9.
Weiner, et al.; Kfuri T; Chan, K; Fowles, JB (2007). E-Iatrogenesis: The most critical unintended consequence of CPOE and other HIT. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 14 (3): 387–388.
William, C.H. (2006). Healthcare Informatics. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional