Encourage Electronic Medical Records:

Without question, a paper-based medical record system is highly inefficient. It not only increases the chance of overlooking important patient information, it leads to the duplication of studies and drives up the cost of healthcare.

However, replacing a paper-based system with an electronic medical record is more easily said than done. Britain spent approximately $20 billion over a 10-year period to develop an electronic medical record. Given our much larger population, a similar effort would cost $100 billion here in the United States. The British experience contained significant frustration and delay because they attempted to create an overly complex system. But as technology races forward, many of these difficulties are being rapidly overcome.

However, a second concern poses a far more serious challenge. Who should control the data? The government? A private company? Who has access to the records? Can medical information be sold? Can whoever manages the system use the web pages to advertise for profit? Who would be allowed to advertise? Who could make changes to the electronic record?

Knowledge is power and many Americans find it difficult to entrust the government with complete access to their personal medical information. Given fear of the government misuse of this information, an alternative model may replace the vision of a national electronic medical records system.

A Local Model

Local medical communities have already begun creating local networks linking physician offices to local hospitals, and linking local hospitals with one another. The obvious advantage of this system is that medical records remain in the hands of local hospitals and physicians. Only those who need to use the information have access. No third parties are involved.

While more limited in scope, this model would improve the medical care for the vast majority of Americans. Most medical care is given on a local level, or in close coordination with a tertiary facility. This model meets these needs while avoiding the transfer of yet more power to Washington.