Electronic Health Records (EHR) Hurts Doctors?  This Argument is a Fail, Much Like Alabama’s refusal to expand Medicaid.

A recent video complains that electronic health records (EHR) mandated by the ACA hurts doctors.  But, in reality EHR improves healthcare drastically.

The the video Mo Brooks complains that having to keep digital records (EHR) and use a common coding system (ICD 10) is expensive and is slowing down doctors and costing them unaffordable amounts of money.  It’s so bad that doctors are quitting.

The thing is, that as we move into 2015 the idea that all of our medical records are in paper folders and need to be faxed around to all our healthcare providers is insane. Keeping a uniform digital system means that when you show up in an out-of-state emergency room the people treating you know everything they need to know instantly, it means when you see a new doctor you aren’t playing scavenger hunt and missing important medical records, it means using our technology to advance healthcare delivery and improve efficiency.

Yes, this new system costs money (about $50,000 over 5 years to implement and support, not $100,000 upfront as suggested in the video).  Yes, this system takes extra time… but we argue the ends really do justify the means.

I recently saw a doctor for a check-up, using “my ObamaCare insurance”.  The schedule was booked so I waited a little longer for an appointment then I had in the past and when I was in the office it took about 5 more minutes then i’d expected due to the new system. So this much is true, but subtract from this the major pains both I and my docs have had over the years faxing papers back and forth and missing vital information that had even in the past resulted in inaccurate diagnosis. A little time upfront, saves a lot of time moving forward and more importantly leads to better healthcare for all of us.

Mo should focus on his state, rather than try to score points by attacking the ACA. Alabama refused to expand Medicaid and have seen the second lowest decline in uninsured in the country at only -0.53%. Maybe docs would have had more patients to treat if Alabama’s leaders supported reform, perhaps this would have offset the extra time and costs necessary for joining the rest of us here the future where we use technology for the purposes of improving patient care.

What do you think?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Samuel on

Like so much about Obamacare, it’s just hype. If it–EHR or Obamacare–were better, they wouldn’t have to force people.

Here’s a Wall Street Journal article from a real doctor: http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/obamacares-electronic-records-debacle

ObamaCareFacts.com on

Being dissatisfied with current EHR functionality, or having a learning curb using the codifying software, is not cause for the repeal of the PPACA… or even simply the EHR system itself. Yes it takes docs a little longer, but it saves them from having to store paper files and fax them between every care provider. This is 2015, we can’t just keep everything in giant filling cabinet anymore. Maybe CATO could use some of it’s brainpower to solve problems, rather than just collecting smartly written complaints. Even the author of the article says, “Congress has devoted scant attention to this issue, instead focusing on the larger ObamaCare debate. But ending the mandatory electronic-health-record program should be a plank in the Republican Party’s health-care agenda. For all the good intentions of the politicians who passed them, electronic health records have harmed my practice and my patients.” He is actually suggesting reform to a specific aspect to the law, not “opt-out of ObamaCare because it takes away individual liberty”. All of this being said. EHR is software and thus has tons of room for improvement. At it’s core, electronic health record keeping in modern healthcare is a smart concept.


It was not “smart” to mandate EHR before EHR products had been standardized to perform safely within a field in which forced dependency upon EHR vendor wares impacts life and limb. Life threatening EHR software errors don’t get any press, but here is at least one reference to this reality: http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/medical-economics/news/how-eliminate-ehr-based-medical-errors?GUID=DD14C34A-8901-4E24-8B76-BBA289E0E6F2&rememberme=1&ts=25022017

The assertion that EHR has “improved health care drastically” is not broadly reality based, but the reverse is undeniably proven by the resulting exodus of America’s limited physician resources because of untenable EHR challenges. Physician specialty shortages are being filled by unqualified ancillary personnel, with catastrophic health care results in terms of delayed diagnoses (such as of melanoma skin cancers and cardiac events).

One day EHR development will complete its due diligence in research and create medical profession practice EHR software with the critical elements needed for safe, reasonable, dependable, affordable, inter-operable, non-disruptive, and secure EHR system for all of American’s diverse medical practice settings. I hope that day comes soon. Until then, it was unforgivable to harm America’s health care by prematurely launching mandatory purchase, upkeep and utilization of inept corporate EHR wares.

I understand that successful Presidential campaigns require funding, but when corporate special interests, rather than sound reasoning, drive un-Constitutional consumer mandates for EHR wares and insurance industry “coverage”, the end result is ABOMINATION-CARE.

Dave Mesh on

Your site claims that keeping electronic health records (EHR) in ” a uniform digital system means that when you show up in an [another doctor’s office] the people treating you know everything they need to know instantly,… you aren’t playing scavenger hunt and missing important medical records, … using our technology to advance healthcare delivery and improve efficiency.” When my primary doctor referred me to a specialist who had me manually fill out a multi-page health info sheet, that they couldn’t transfer the info electronically because the specialist was not on their “Patient [electronic] Portal”.

What does EHR law currently require? When?

ObamaCareFacts.com on

Hmmm, sorry, I know the gist of this from reading the legislation, but I don’t know the exact workings. Maybe someone else will?


I am a medical doctor and I have first hand knowledge of the impact of Obamacare EHR mandates upon America’s health care providers and patients.

Obama-care’s EHR predominantly functions fas an expensive insurance claims platform which expands non-medical access to sensitive patient details, tellingly geared toward denial of coverage of medical services and benefits. The wrong people are accessing sensitive medical information of Obamacare’s EHRs and for all the wrong reasons. Obama’s administration even opened up access of mental health records to law enforcement! This is the most extreme form of profiling, prejudice and catastrophic betrayal by the Obama administration. Stigmatic breeching of the confidential records of patients who have sought mental health care is ignorant, hateful, cruel and shamefully biased.

Obamacare’s mandate to implement expensive and flawed EHR software was recklessly launched in advance of the technology needed for EHR security. How can Obama’s administration defend the widespread hacking and epic breaches of America’s most sensitive patient information which resulted from mandated utilization of flawed corporate EHR wares? Millions of EHR records have been hacked, exposing those patients to identity theft and impersonations of American citizenry. In spite of this, Obama ignored the issue of electronic hacking until hacking impacted his own party’s Presidential candidate of 2016.

Corporate access to subscriber’s medical data insinuated illegitimate corporate medical authority over the doctor-patient relationship, resulting in non-payment of medical services from second guessing treatment by non-medical administrators. Medical practices were
subsequently subjected to bankruptcy. One submitted, this electronic data is utilized primarily for claims denials by corporate payors, NOT for the benefit of any patient’s medical care, medical research or for saving the rain forest. The mandate for America’s medical practices to purchase and upkeep flawed EHR software was launched in advance of EHR software interoperability for communicating with the patient’s other physicians and bona-fide medical researchers.

Indentured servitude of physicians to electronic records serves corporate health insurer’s cost reduction, but coverage costs to patient actually increased. The countless hours of daily non-reimbursable EHR labors are so onerous that many doctors chose early retirement to avoid such enslavement. Doctors are fined by Medicare for conscientious refusal to participate in EHR, as are those physicians in remote medical practices who are unable to participate in EHR due to inadequate internet service or computer support staff. Medical practices which acquiesce to EHR face electronic transmission failures, computer crashes, lost revenue, lost data, increased HIPAA privacy fines, increased medico-legal exposure and EHR maintenance costs in excess of $30,000.00 per year per physician. A data entry glitch into a confusing EHR program can result in a life altering charge of Medicare fraud or result in patient profiling by law enforcement. Nevertheless corporate EHR vendors face no liability for the consequences of their expensively flawed wares, which Obamacare forced physicians to purchase.

Obamacare’s EHR is, at best, a regulatory mandate to finance prematurely released electronic data systems in exchange for corporate software and health insurance industry financial support for political aspirations. At worst, EHR is a vehicle of espionage against medical privacy and voting citizens’ identities.



Obama’s strategic platform for EHR regulatory mandates achieved special interest corporate support of Obama’s political aspirations, but at a cost of harmfully disrupting America’s actual health care delivery.

Flawed, hackable, counter-productive, medically unsophisticated and expensive corporate electronic medical vendor wares were misrepresented as ready for the launching of mandatory electronic health record systems (EHRs). Consumption of corporate EHR wares, devoid of liability for product defects, was legislatively forced upon America’s over-regulated and financially burdened physician workforce.

Obama’s regulatory mandates for electronic health records systems were launched in advance of application readiness, interoperability and in advance of the technology needed for secure electronic patient data. Millions of electronic patient records have been hacked since Obamacare mandated EHRs.



Corporate “Coverage” is NOT health care! Repeal Abomination-Care!

ObamaCareFacts.com on

Hmm, I gotta say I like that the complaint comes with a song. As far as internet comments go, why not?

Would you say that a better implemented EHR is in order then? For me it seems like we can’t go back to paper, so I feel like reform is probably a good step?


Who is “we”? Are you talking about my patients’ medical records? “We” do not need to fix things that were never broken. “We” most certainly do not need to replace a secure records system with an expensive electronic software system which exposes patients to identity theft and profiling. Corporate EHR wares were mandated to be purchased and implemented BEFORE any standardized proven EHR system was ready for widespread launching into America’s diverse medical specialties and practices. America was forced to subsidize EHR software systems that benefited, not health care, but rather the special financial interests of software and insurance corporations.

Obama’s health care platform strategically attracted campaign financing from the giant corporate special interests benefited by non-Constitutional Obamacare mandates. Forcing America’s private medical practices to purchase, maintain and utilize heavily flawed EHR electronic transmission systems impinges upon the civil rights of patient and doctors alike. And here is the kicker, if that expensive electronic health record system is hacked, the physician faces fines which can mount as high as up to $50,000.00 per record. Isn’t this a little harsh given that national secrets were spilled from Hillary’s electronic email account without even a slap on the wrist?

No one seems to mind that Obama promised America health care, and all we got was forced into buying expensive “coverage”. No one seems to mind that Americans are still bankrupted by medical expenses when they get sick. Isn’t it odd that working class Americans, who are bankrupted by medical expenses, now face a worse financial debt load than the patients who chose to be fined rather than purchase health insurance under Obama’s administration? Coverage is not health care. In fact, the two are often mutually exclusive when corporate gate keepers get to determine coverage benefits and then pocket the difference.

One day, when there exists a rational EHR system which honors America’s medical privacy, civil rights, pocketbook, medical access, qualified medical care and health care delivery, sign me up. Until then, don’t push America off an electronic cliff before restoring the civil rights and liberties needed for health care reform to fly.

Theresa Pussi Artist BrownGold on

It is absurd that I can get a train schedule from Japan in a minute on a smartphone but I have to somehow shuffle papers and make sure that all my providers have all the test results or the tests are redone.
We are so far behind peer nations.
A lot of what you said is factually incorrect. Bankruptcies are down post Obamacare.Junk policies are finally outlawed. What good is insurance if it doesn’t cover basic, essential services?

Yes, EHR have had a very bumpy start. But to say the system wasn’t broken is like saying why have electricity when candles work just fine. Let’s make the system function they way it serves us best. That takes intention to make change happen.

If one doesn’t think healthcare is a human right, then say so. That is the real debate.