Survey Makes “Compelling Case” for Electronic Records

Findings from an international survey highlighting problems with quality of care and wasted resources make a “compelling case” for electronic medical records and computerised prescribing systems, according to Karen Davis, president of the Commonwealth Fund.

The survey, conducted by the Commonwealth Fund, the Harvard School of Public Health and Harris Interactive, investigated the experience of patients with health problems in the UK, US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The authors say they found disturbingly high rates of medical errors, lack of coordination, poor communication between doctors and patients and barriers hindering access to care.

Ms Davis said, “Frequent errors, miscommunication and wasted resources from duplicate tests, delays and conflicting information are common problems in the health systems of all the countries studied. These findings highlight serious problems with quality of care and wasted resources and make a compelling case for implementing interventions that we know will make a difference, including electronic medical records and computerised systems for physician ordering of prescription drugs.”

The findings related specifically to the UK produced the good news that UK patients worry far less about costs than those in the other countries surveyed, though dental care was a concern with 21% of the survey group reporting skipped dental care due to cost.

Dissatisfaction with the health care system was also lower than in other countries but still ran at 31%. The patients most likely to express dissatisfaction were those who had experienced medical errors, care coordination problems, long waits or communication problems.

Errors and care coordination problems among the UK group more than doubled among patients who had seen three or more doctors in the past three years. For example, reports of records and test results not reaching the doctor in time for an appointment shot up from 14% for patients who saw one or two doctors to 29% for those who saw three or more in a two year period. Duplicate tests rose from 6% to 17%.

The survey used was based on telephone interviews with 3849 adults (750 in the UK) who met at least one of four criteria: they reported their health as fair or poor or had experienced serious illness in the previous two years requiring intensive medical care, major surgery or hospitalisation for something other than a normal birth.