Hospitals not always prepared for full costs of implementing electronic patient records

Hospitals don't always take into account the full costs of implementing new electronic health record systems and should be better prepared if they are to maximise the benefits, finds research published online in the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA).

Electronic health record (EHR) systems can improve the safety, quality, and efficiency of healthcare in hospitals, and their adoption is a priority for the UK and US governments.

But despite their promise and the existence of EHRs in UK primary care for several decades, UK hospitals have been slow to adopt the technology, citing cost as a significant barrier, say the study authors.

As part of England's £12.7 billion (US$20 billion) National Programme for IT (NPfIT), three EHR systems were procured centrally: iSOFT's Lorenzo Regional Care; Cerner's Millennium; and CSE's RiO. But their implementation has been fraught with difficulty.

And the English government announced the dismantlement of the programme in September 2011, after a Cabinet Office review concluded it was "not fit to provide the modern IT services that the NHS needs."

The researchers evaluated the implementation of the three systems in 12 diverse healthcare organisations, in three different regions of the country, and at different stages of implementing these systems.

They also carried out 41 semi- structured interviews with 36 , members of the local implementation team, and those involved in the implementation at a national level, between February 2009 and January 2011.

They identified four overarching cost categories associated with implementing an EHR system: infrastructure (such as hardware and software); personnel (such as a project managers and training teams); estates/facilities (furniture, fittings and space); other (such as training materials).

Many factors affected these costs, with different hospitals choosing varying amounts and types of infrastructure, diverse training approaches for staff, and different software applications.

Some of the hospitals incurred significant costs in testing the software while some spent a lot of money training clinicians and administrative staff to use the new system, using either one-to-one, classroom, or mass training sessions, or different combinations of both.

The decision to backfill staff on the wards varied among hospitals, with one hospital stumping up a one-off cost of £750,000 (over US$1.1 million) to provide cover for clinical staff who were being trained to use EHRs, while another spent no money at all on providing cover.

The analysis showed that, overall, implementation proceeded at a much slower pace than expected, with many challenges along the way.

Out of the four main categories of associated expenditure identified, hospitals were most likely to cut back on training and implementation costs.

Certain factors were systematically under-appreciated in project planning, including the need to back fill staff due to lost productivity, and the need to test the system due to inadequate vendor testing.

"With cost considered one of the most significant barriers, it is important for hospitals and governments to be clear from the outset of the major cost categories involved and the factors that may impact on these costs," conclude the authors.

If organisations don't take these factors on board, they risk failure, the authors warn.

"Failure to adequately train staff or to follow key steps in implementation has preceded many of the failures in this domain, which can create new safety hazards," they say.

More information: A qualitative study identifying the cost categories associated with electronic health record implementation in the UK, Online First, DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002404

Related Stories

Electronic prescribing in NHS hospitals patchy at best

date Nov 22, 2013

(Medical Xpress)—Patchy use of electronic prescribing in NHS hospitals – and the huge diversity of systems - creates huge challenges for both patient safety and staff training, according to a new study ...

Pediatrician adoption of EHR systems lagging behind

date Nov 19, 2012

(HealthDay)—Pediatricians' adoption of fully functional electronic health record (EHR) systems is lagging and fraught with financial and productivity concerns, according to a study published online Nov. ...

Recommended for you

Footpaths and parks support active school commute

date 15 hours ago

While it probably won't make the idea of attending school more appealing social scientists say different infrastructure and behaviour change programs are key to encouraging young people to take a more active ...

Food barometer measures a population’'s eating habits

date 16 hours ago

A survey by Taylor's-Toulouse University Centre (TTUC) is collecting data on the food habits of individuals and how their choices are related to modernisation and other social factors. Results show that almost ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Feb 13, 2014
The medical fraternity is far from satisfied when it comes to EHR implementation. Last year has been very eventful for the Healthcare IT industry, with the widespread adoption of HIPPA, Hitech regulations and the approaching deadlines for Healthcare organizations to switch to EHRs have definitely led to some systems being implemented in a chaotic manner without due importance given to meaningful use, also aiding to this turmoil is the constantly changing regulatory landscape.

Do let me know your views on this.

For EHRs to be really transformational , one needs an system which is flexible, interoperable and can adapt to changing compliance requirements easily. Following up on this, I came across and registered for a webinar on Healthcare IT: Role of EDI in Affordable Care Act Reforms, it looks a promising one

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.