Morning Read: Do electronic health records actually save money?

Highlights of the important and the interesting from the world of healthcare:

Do electronic health records actually save money? The short answer is, “We don’t know.” The long answer is slightly more complex, but no more conclusive. Despite electronic health records’ enjoyment of widespread support among conservatives and liberals alike, measuring their value is a much trickier proposition. Considering the federal government last year pledged $19 billion toward EHRs as part of the stimulus package, it’d be nice to know whether there could be any sort of decent return to the nation’s health system on that investment. A recent study of savings generated at the Department of Veterans Affairs has drawn lots of attention, but it’s important to read the fine print. The study concluded that the VA may have saved $3.1 billion over 10 years thanks to EHRs, but it’s not so straightforward. In an interview with Kaiser Health News, the study’s lead researcher stressed the dollar amount reflects only what’s possible–not actual savings.

The possible dollar amount was based on things like faster access to records for staffers; reduced spending on radiological film; and the drug interactions prevented by electronic records and, therefore, the care not needed, Kaiser reported. Unfortunately, President Obama may have relied on dubious estimates of savings generated by EHRs when promising to fund health IT on the campaign trail. So it’s an important question to wonder what, if anything, EHRs will do to slow rapidly escalating health costs in the U.S.

With the Rise of AI, What IP Disputes in Healthcare Are Likely to Emerge?

Munck Wilson Mandala Partner Greg Howison shared his perspective on some of the legal ramifications around AI, IP, connected devices and the data they generate, in response to emailed questions.

One doctor’s iPad experience: There’s been lots and lots of speculation about what the iPad would mean for the medical industry. Now that this endlessly hyped device has finally arrived, one Boston ER doctor has put it to the test, carrying it with him during a shift last weekend. The initial review, albeit from just one physician, is very positive. Dr. Larry Nathanson reports that the device displayed his hospitals clinical applications, such as order entry and EKG readings, very well. The battery life is “astounding” and more than enough to make it through an entire ER shift. Drawbacks include its fragility and unlikliness to be forgiving of drops to the floor, plus the difficulty of entering “strong passwords,” Dr. Nathanson reports. Couple the doctor’s report with the pronouncement by Chilmark Research that the device may very well be a (cliche alert) “game changer” for health IT, and it looks like the iPad is a winner for healthcare.

Buried in paperwork: A Mayo Clinic study from earlier this year reveals a disturbing trend among residents’ work hours. These physicians-in-training spend twice as much time on documention as their counterparts from 20 years earlier, the New York Times reports. Moreover, a majority of residents in the study reported spending up to six hours a day on documentation, while only a small amount spent that much time with patients. And electronic health records often exacerbate the problem, as time-pressed residents often rely on cutting and pasting information from previous patient visits rather than actually speaking with patients, which would certainly take longer, to obtain information.

Further, the excessive-documentation problem lead residents to make clinical decisions with less time spent investigating the complexities of a patient’s symptoms. According to the study’s author:

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Where do they really learn medicine?’ If it’s with patients, then we have to make sure we preserve that face-to-face time. We have to preserve what is really important in terms of the learning environment because the habits doctors-in-training learn now will become their practice habits long-term.”