EHRs and medicolegal risk: How they help, when they could hurt

The widespread use of electronic health records has been hailed as panacea and derided as anathema to quality medical care and medicolegal security. Here’s what you should know about their weaknesses and strengths.

Dr. Gimovsky is a Maternal-Fetal Medicine Specialist at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center in Newark, New Jersey, and Clinical Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Medicine at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City.

Dr. Tran is a House Officer in Obstetrics and Gynecology at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center in Newark, New Jersey.

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

The medical record has evolved considerably since it originated in ancient Greece as a narrative of cure.¹ For one thing, it’s now electronic. For another, it’s no longer a medical record but a health record. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, the distinction is not a trivial one. A medical record is used by clinicians mostly for diagnosis and treatment, whereas the health record focuses on the total wellbeing of the patient.² The medical record is used primarily within a practice. The electronic health record (EHR) reaches across borders to other offices, institutions, and clinicians.