Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

137718-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This thesis concerns the adoption of health information technology in the medical sector, specifically electronic health records (EHRs). EHRs have been seen as a great benefit to the healthcare system and will improve the quality of patient care. The federal government, has seen the benefit EHRs can offer, has been

This thesis concerns the adoption of health information technology in the medical sector, specifically electronic health records (EHRs). EHRs have been seen as a great benefit to the healthcare system and will improve the quality of patient care. The federal government, has seen the benefit EHRs can offer, has been advocating the use and adoption of EHR for nearly a decade now. They have created policies that guide medical providers on how to implement EHRs. However, this thesis concerns the attitudes medical providers in Phoenix have towards government implementation. By interviewing these individuals and cross-referencing their answers with the literature this thesis wants to discover the pitfalls of federal government policy toward EHR implementation and EHR implementation in general. What this thesis found was that there are pitfalls that the federal government has failed to address including loss of provider productivity, lack of interoperability, and workflow improvement. However, the providers do say there is still a place for government to be involved in the implementation of EHR.
ContributorsKaldawi, Nicholas Emad (Author) / Lewis, Paul (Thesis director) / Cortese, Denis (Committee member) / Jones, Ruth (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Human Evolution and Social Change (Contributor)
Created2013-05
Description
Electronic Health Records (EHRs) began to be introduced in the 1960s. Government-run hospitals were the primary adopters of technology. The rate of adoption continually rose from there, doubling from 2007 to 2012 from 34.8% to about 71%. Most of the growth seen from 2007 to 2012 is a result of

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) began to be introduced in the 1960s. Government-run hospitals were the primary adopters of technology. The rate of adoption continually rose from there, doubling from 2007 to 2012 from 34.8% to about 71%. Most of the growth seen from 2007 to 2012 is a result of the passage of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act as part of the American Reinvestment and Recovery (ARRA) Act. $19 billion dollars were made available as part of these two acts to increase the rate of Health Information Technology (HIT), of which EHRs are a large part. A national health information network is envisioned for the end stages of HITECH which will enable health information to be exchanged immediately from one health network to another. While the ability to exchange data quickly appears to be an achievable goal, it might come with the cost of loss of usability and functionality for providers who interact with the EHRs and often enter health data into an EHR. The loss of usability can be attributed to how the EHR was designed.
ContributorsRobinson, Lillie Elizabeth (Author) / Doebbeling, Bradley (Thesis director) / Chiou, Erin (Committee member) / College of Health Solutions (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
165115-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Patient identification is becoming more crucially important, particularly as healthcare is becoming more data based and automated. Patient misidentification can cause a series of issues that affect patient safety and the quality of care, including increased time and money from the medical institution. Additionally, with the lack of standardization for

Patient identification is becoming more crucially important, particularly as healthcare is becoming more data based and automated. Patient misidentification can cause a series of issues that affect patient safety and the quality of care, including increased time and money from the medical institution. Additionally, with the lack of standardization for identifying patients, interoperability is limited and Health Information Exchange cannot be optimized, One partial solution to the problem would be the implementation of a Unique Patient Identifier system; however, the United States has had some controversy over the implementation of such as system in the past as Congress prohibited any funding from going towards a UPI system in 1998 after HIPAA introduced a Unique Patient Identifier mandate in 1996. However, with more than 2 decades passing since the Congressional ban, the general American perception of Unique Patient Identifiers is not well known. This study attempts to answer the question of the current American perception of the implementation of a UPI system through an informational survey that induces critical thinking when answering qualitative questions with supportive quantitative questions. Participants were generally in favor of the implementation of a UPI system, and through a Chi-square analysis, it was shown that there was an association between knowledge learned about Unique Patient Identifiers in relation to the current identification system and developing a positive perception towards UPI implementation; however, this study cannot be generalized to the public as the sample size was not large enough and was not representative of the entire population. Still, future research should be conducted in relation to this subject as UPIs are a potential solution to our current “identity crisis”.

ContributorsWeaver Salazar, Kambíz (Author) / Chiou, Erin (Thesis director) / Roscoe, Rod (Committee member) / O'Keefe, Kelly (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Human Systems Engineering (Contributor) / College of Integrative Sciences and Arts (Contributor)
Created2022-05