In a recent Chilmark research article, we are introduced to the term Collaborative Health Records (CHRs). While sweet and encompassing in name, the implications of this novel health recording system have the capability of changing the contours of how we perceive all electronic health information systems.
As mentioned in the article, divisions between patient centric and hospital centric health records can create a potential problem of hindering care rather than promoting it. CHRs are defined as a collaborative effort that seamlessly link EHRs and PHRs, which are geared towards the medical community and patients respectively.
Information liquidity remains to be a pertinent issue and it seems as though the development of the “Collaborative Health Record” can bring light to the situation. Cerner’s Health 2.0 demonstration of Cerner Health and Cerner Active presents a comparable model of how CHRs may work in the future. Within their model, information is seamlessly shared between the two applications. Even with increased liquidity, many questions can be asked of its viability.
On another note, current market fluxes like Google’s tango with their PHR and Epic’s release of their MyChart iPhone app have been steamrolling the competition in EHR installations. Meanwhile, Verizon and Orange Telecom have been providing larger Health Information Exchange (HIE) infrastructures to push adaptation towards to CHRs from EHRs and PHRs too.
Until then, I pose this question: What are the largest barriers you see blocking full adoption of CHRs?
