An attempt was made to justify electronic medical records in our local paper today. The writer said,”..some doctors are wary of electronic medical records at all, arguing that they take extra time and can actually decrease efficiency.” This is true, but only partly true. Physicians have multiple objections to electronic medical records, not the least of which is the breach of confidentiality these records, once digitized, represent. Computerized medical records in the operating room arena are a disaster, distracting the operating room nurse from the surgery and the recovery room nurses from the patient. Several surgeons have told me that the introduction of computerized medical records in the operating room has added one hour to time between cases. Rooms and rooms of paper medical records can be stored now on a small disk. Health records, like any others, once digitized are much easier for bureaucrats to grab.
Here is the creepy part, though. The federal government is paying physicians and facilities to install these systems. Have companies that peddle these systems contributed to certain political campaigns? Why exactly do the folks in D.C. care whether our records are on paper or on a disk? Is it because they care about you and me and want what is best for us? Don’t make me laugh. If electronic medical records made sense in the marketplace, physicians and facilities would have done this long ago on their own without the bribes and extortion of the feds.
Knowledge is power. The health care zealots in D.C. want to know what is wrong with you. Not because they want to feel your pain. Remember that one man’s disease or illness or injury becomes every man’s problem once health care is socialized. ”Those in charge” will eventually ration care and they know it. This digitalization of medical records is a precursor to the national illness statistics, that once compiled will undoubtedly be reviewed so that “appropriate care” can be determined by some brilliant bureaucrat far from your reach. More than likely, certain illnesses will fit into a bracket of “untreatable” due to the history of costs associated with this or that disease.
I believe that you are better off if no one, particularly government bureaucrats, knows what ails you. If you have a chronic illness and are covered by national health insurance, the bureaucrats want you dead. Your death will help their balance sheet when they show how efficiently health care dollars have been managed by them once in control. Any excuse to make this health information available to the government will do: helping rural doctors stay connected, everyone knowing your medications and allergies, emergency rooms made aware of your health history before you get there….I’m sure there are others.
Electronic medical record keeping in certain practice settings might make sense. I know ophthalmologists who love them because they can take digital pictures and include them in the record. I know orthopedists who love them because they have eliminated carrying x-rays around. Making this information shareable online is a slippery slope, though. That our government is paying physicians and facilities (and actually punishing them for not converting by promising lower Medicare payments) is reason enough to question if not resist this effort. Our records are made of paper and we intend to keep it that way.
G. Keith Smith, M.D.
