How Archiving Supports Whichever CHR Wins the Race

There is a debate in healthcare IT: Should the future of electronic medical records evolve with a comprehensive health record or connected health record model? Both claim the CHR acronym, but, there are some significant differences in terms of the promise and the reality of implementation.

Let’s take a minute to look at the two schools of thought.

First, the comprehensive health record focuses on collecting more data on the patient and saving it in one giant health record that — in theory — can be shared across different providers when needed. The benefits of this approach take into account expanded data points including care delivered outside the hospital, such as telehealth.

Critics of this approach say that one system cannot truly collect or house the multitude of data from different points of care available today — including patient-generated health data and genomic data — and that this approach limits the opportunity for shared care planning and coordination, family caregivers and non-clinical settings of healthcare. They say interoperability is a national priority precisely because no single vendor EHR system is comprehensive, and there should be interoperability across the myriad data types, sources, authorized users, and use cases.

In contrast, industry analysts claim the connected health record would provide the dynamics of an interactive, learning health system. Patients, providers, population health agencies, registries, payers, researchers, social service agencies, community centers, and accountable care organizations all would have access to interconnected systems and records. This approach suggests real-time access and updates that would provide greater opportunities for adaptive rather than reactive care.

For example, a chronically ill patient who develops a new infection would benefit from that information being immediately transmitted to the primary doctor, specialists and family caregiver who all would participate in the care plan.

Reference Source:

https://www.emrandehr.com/2018/03/26/comprehensive-health-record-vs-connected-health-record/

Both models are largely in the beginning stages and will take a lot of heavy lifting as well as industry cooperation to move forward.  It seems the bottom line is that the future of medical records is expected to provide a wider breadth of data points to support better care outcomes.

Archiving Supports the CHR or the CHR– Whichever Format Becomes the Standard

Harmony Healthcare IT is tuned in to this industry issue because we wholeheartedly agree that everyone will benefit from the full patient narrative.  As healthcare providers move forward with system replacement and technology advancements, our team is focused on providing a secure solution for maintaining access to legacy health records.

Our HealthData Archiver® supports record retention requirements and provides long-term, secure access to historical records that contribute to a more robust care plan.

HealthData Archiver® offers the flexibility necessary and ensures critical health data is available when, where, and how it is needed. This improves workflows, provides accurate data for patient care and supports efficient eDiscovery.  There are numerous features to HealthData Archiver® that support the instant accessibility of patient or employee records for a healthcare organization. Learn more here or contact us to discuss our solution and how we contribute to the CHR with our CCHA (Comprehensive, Connected Health Archive)!

Apr 25 2018

Ready to learn more?

Contact us today to learn more about our healthcare data management solutions.

First Name *
Last Name *
Email *

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Sign me up