Electronic medical record (EMR)

Why it matters

In tenders and brochures the terms EMR and EHR are often used interchangeably, but they describe different scopes. The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology describes an EMR as a digital version of the paper charts in a clinician's office, used mainly for diagnosis and treatment, with information that does not travel easily outside the practice [1]. A hospital or ministry that needs records to follow patients between facilities should state sharing requirements explicitly rather than rely on the label.

Key points

• An EMR lets a practice track data over time, identify patients due for screening and monitor measures such as blood pressure [1].
• An EHR extends the record beyond one organisation, so information moves with the patient across providers [1][2].
• A systematic review of implementations in low resource settings grouped success criteria into ethical, financial, functional, organisational, political, technical and training categories [3].
• An EMR without exchange standards can become an island that has to be replaced later.

In Moana

Moana is built as a shared record rather than a single practice EMR, so a clinic can start on one site and extend the same Moana EHR to other facilities as it grows.

Sources

1. EMR vs EHR: what is the difference?, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, 2011
2. Health informatics: electronic health record definition, scope and context (ISO/TR 20514), International Organization for Standardization, listed by the Australian Digital Health Agency, 2005
3. Success criteria for electronic medical record implementations in low resource settings: a systematic review, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2015