NR 361 Week 4 Discussion

Student Name

Chamberlain University

NR-361: RN Information Systems in Healthcare

Prof. Name:

Date

Week 4 Discussion Topic NR 361: Case Study Analysis

A 65-year-old woman was recently diagnosed with Stage 3 non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in her primary care physician’s office. Upon leaving the office, she reviewed her test and lab results at home with her family by logging into her Personal Health Record (PHR). However, she was only able to access a portion of her results. The reason for this issue was that her lab tests were conducted at different locations: some were done at an independent lab, some in the emergency room, and some within the physician’s office’s lab. This situation highlights a common problem in clinical practice, where patients receive care from multiple organizations, each potentially using different systems. The ability to access PHR data is essential, but the lack of interoperability between different healthcare facilities creates gaps in the patient’s medical data, which can complicate their understanding of their condition and treatment plan.

Pros and Cons of the Situation

One major benefit of having access to a PHR is that patients can view and manage data from various healthcare visits, tests, and lab results. This empowers patients to be more informed about their health and supports better coordination of care. However, in the case of this patient, there are notable disadvantages. Since the PHR cannot aggregate data from all healthcare facilities she visited, some of her test results were inaccessible. This left the patient with incomplete information, necessitating contact with each facility to obtain the missing data. The inability to sync all healthcare providers to a single, unified PHR creates a barrier to achieving the full benefits of personal health management. This fragmentation of information impedes continuity of care and patient outcomes, which the PHR system is intended to improve.

Safeguards in Patient Portals and PHRs

There are several safeguards built into patient portals and PHRs to ensure the security of patient data. According to Hebda (2013), PHRs are private and secure applications that allow individuals to access, manage, and share their health information. Access is restricted to authorized users, typically requiring login credentials. Some PHRs also allow proxy users, such as family members, to access the data. Furthermore, PHR systems utilize secure messaging features, where messages between patients and healthcare providers are encrypted and authenticated to prevent unauthorized access. This secure messaging system is vital for maintaining confidentiality in patient-provider communications (Hebda, 2013). Additionally, when PHRs are integrated with Electronic Health Records (EHRs) in hospital settings, they are protected by HIPAA regulations, ensuring the privacy and safety of patient data.

Agreement with the Process

The process of using PHRs has both positive and negative aspects. The unification of treatments, ability to monitor health status, and ease of communicating with healthcare providers about concerns or follow-up appointments are clear benefits. Over time, PHRs facilitate better health management, whether the data is entered manually by the patient or automatically synced from various healthcare visits. However, the limitation that not all healthcare facilities sync data with the PHR is a downside. Nevertheless, patients can always obtain physical copies of their records from those facilities and maintain them for reference, although this is less convenient.

Challenges for Patients Lacking Full Access to EHRs

One of the major challenges for patients who do not have access to their full EHRs is the disruption in continuity of care. As noted by Vydra et al. (2015), “tethered” PHRs, which are linked to a physician’s Electronic Medical Record (EMR), typically provide only a subset of the patient’s health information. This limited access to data can hinder a patient’s understanding of their health status and treatment plan. Gaps in test results or lab work may lead to confusion regarding diagnoses, treatments, or follow-up care. Additionally, medical terminology can be difficult for patients to understand, making it challenging for them to interpret their records accurately. Without access to comprehensive information, patients may struggle to manage their health effectively.

References:

Hebda, T., & Czar, P. (2013). Handbook of informatics for nurses & healthcare professionals (5th ed.). Pearson.