Healthcare Document Imaging: Good or Bad for the Medical Offices?
The debate as to whether healthcare document imaging is good or bad for medical offices has been a focus of the medical industry for the last few years. In addition to published research findings, various medical industry pundits have weighed in with their personal and professional opinion on the emerging healthcare document imaging paradigm. All of this dialogue has resulted in both positive and negative feedback about the practice.
The Good
A 2009 article by Pat Basu, Physician and Course Director of Health Policy, Finance and Economics, Stanford University, for Kaiser Health News, entitled, “Medical Imaging: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly,” offered some insights. The article provided a number of examples of how “imaging has been a crucial tool for better diagnosis and effective cures.” For example, Dr. Basu stated:
“A nationwide survey of physicians in Health Affairs revealed CT and MRI to be the most important modern medical innovation, outranking both famous drugs (statins, HIV and chemotherapy) and interventions (angioplasty, laparoscopic surgery and joint replacement). Imaging has enabled physicians to catch diseases earlier, decrease hospitalization and replace invasive surgeries. Yet, because total imaging growth has outpaced growth in other areas of medicine, some have called for simple, unilateral cuts in imaging. That would be tantamount to banning sales in personal computers because their sales growth outpaced that of typewriters. It is important to note that advancements in imaging are just that – advancements. They have rendered more primitive forms of medicine obsolete.”
The Bad
Yet, despite the benefits of healthcare document imaging, which involves such applications as digital X-rays, prescription forms and refill orders, digital medical records, and digital patient forms, there are still issues. Dr. Basu noted:
“Too many unnecessary or repeat exams are performed; inappropriate utilization that forms the "bad" in the trio. The reasons for this inappropriate imaging include patient demands, fear of medical malpractice, lack of knowledge about when to use imaging, and incomplete clinical examinations prior to requesting an imaging study.”
There is concern that security may still be compromised within the digital environment while other practitioners are also worried about training staff and keeping up with the ongoing regulatory changes and compliance problems that could lead to greater risk for malpractice or other financial burdens.
The Divided
As such, there is still a gap that exists between those that agree that this process could be of benefit and those that are worry of the risks and problems involved. Until the concerns are reconciled and the risk/benefit analysis overwhelmingly skews positively, the number of practitioners migrating to a digital, or paperless, process may stagnate.
In Review
The main points covered in this blog post are:
- There are many perceived benefits for healthcare document imaging, including efficiency, lower costs, the ability to focus on core business segments and clientele and better decision making.
- However, the perceived bad aspects are inappropriate imaging, fear of malpractice, lack of knowledge and training, fear of the unknown and ongoing regulatory changes that further confuse those involved.
- More information and standardization may be needed to close the current divide between the side for digital imaging and the side against such a process.
Fig Gungor is CEO of OneSource Document Management, a New York based company that offers a broad range of customized copy and scanning services that translate into a significant savings for insurance companies, hospitals and large medical facilities.