EMR/EHR vs. PHR, ad nauseam
Mainstream media still don’t get it. Personal health records and electronic health records/electronic medical records are not the same thing. Yet, on the agenda for next month’s annual Association of Health Care Journalists conference is a panel entitled “Personal electronic medical records: What will consumers need to know?”
The meeting is here in Chicago next month, but I already have plans to be out of town. I’m debating whether to change those plans to attend this meeting, because there are some sessions that could be of value to me. I may want to go just to be a voice for reporting on health IT. The lack of focus on health IT was what made me quit AHCJ four years ago.
Every time I see the phrase, “electronic personal health records,” my blood boils. Last time was this Dec. 2, 2009, article in something called eSecurity Planet that erroneously said the federal stimulus was paying for “electronic personal health records.” I used this story as an example for a yet-to-be published piece I’ve written for Reporting on Health, a project of the USC Annenberg School and California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowship.
For the record, I define an EHR as, at least in theory, a comprehensive digital collection of information about an individual’s health and medical status that encompasses multiple care settings. EMR means a record tied to a single facility or organization. The two phrases often are used interchangeably, and I think that’s OK for now.
A PHR, to me, is a record that patients can view, update and control access to. It is a subset of an EHR, not a synonym.
Neil–you are so fussy. Most of these electronic records are after all about people!
There is not enough consensus to point semantic fingers. But I must say "personal electronic medical record" is silly.
There'd better be some consensus pretty soon because we're about to spend $20 billion to $40 billion of taxpayer money on these things!
Your definitions are, I believe, generally understood and agreed upon by those of us who work in the biz – even though, through laziness or inattention to detail, we do tend to use EHR and EMR interchangeably. If you can have an impact on the journalists who are increasingly interested in the HIT industry – who will influence and educate the public – I vote for you changing your plans and attending this conference! While we’re all having these conversations with family and friends who are suddenly very interested in the mysterious work we’ve been doing for decades, this grassroots approach will take too many more decades. And if ARRA funds spent on HIT don’t produce the expected results and benefits, we’ll have set ourselves back another generation and have even more ‘splaining to do, Lucy!
While I share your pain on semantic issues (don't get me started on double exclamation marks or all caps in online writing *shudders*), there are some reasons for the confusion. First, there are a great many acronymns/terms to master in this field, and more added everyday. Too, and correct me if I'm wrong, the HITECH act never uses the term "EMR," it always says "EHR." However, I have yet to see a commerical product labeled an "EHR," they're usually either Brand X EMR or Brand X PM. Add Brand X PHR to the mix, and the confusion can really begin.Finally, I've read a number of people question whether there should be such clear divisions. After all, with the MU requirement of providing patients access to their electronic records, what (to the patient) is the difference between a portal to the EHR or a PHR that aggregates this same information? Many people still believe Internet Explorer is the internet, and have no concept of what a browser is. That's a real fallacy for me as a web developer, but not to thoses who don't care how they get online, so long as it happens.So yes, journalists should know these differences and report them. But practically speaking, there has to be enough demand for that information before increasingly short-staffed, budget-strapped newspapers will devote the time to such dedicated reporting, especially when there's that nice, juicy subject of health care reform everyone wants to read about.
The EMR is currently the patient’s medical record, controlled and maintained by the provider, while the PHR is health-related information the patient controls and maintains.
All I know that the EMR is currently the patient’s medical record, controlled and maintained by the provider, while the PHR is health-related information the patient controls and maintains. This is very informative and good to explore this.mjd