Introduction
The primary aim of the state policy in the field of healthcare and any medical organization is to provide high-quality and significant medical care to the population. However, this goal cannot be achieved without taking into account the interests of customers, which must always be at the forefront. If you look at the treatment process from the point of view of the patient, then in addition to the quality of the medical care itself, such factors as comfort, lack of queues, speed of service at the registry and the doctor’s office, and prompt access to information about the studies performed are also important. These and many other tasks are best solved by introducing process-oriented management using automated information systems in medical organizations. Below, it will be discussed that the benefits of implementing such systems are apparent not only for clients but also for the employees of the medical organization and the efficiency of the institution.
Automated Information Systems in Medical Organizations
The advantages of electronic medical records are the automatic delivery of an outpatient card to the doctor, registration of services determined by the doctor to the patient in relation to insurance contracts, and also in accounting for the control of the balance of payments. This data is further used for the purposes of accounting and tax accounting (Lai & Afseth, 2019). The introduction of this system and support for the effectiveness of managerial and clinical decisions are achieved by regulating all the processes of the medical organization.
A clear step-by-step specification and fixation of the work technology of each employee, fixed in in-house documents, help to manage the financial result of a healthcare institution. At the same time, it is easier to notice which stage of the organization’s activity brings unreasonable expenses or shortfalls in income and how this situation can be changed in a favorable direction. In addition, the regulation of the actions of specialists of a medical organization, based on standardization, contributes to the attainment of controllability of the clinical result of the activity.
Currently, the choice of software products in the information technology market for medical organizations is quite wide and is expanding every year. Many organizations have already appreciated the benefits of using electronic health records, which naturally include an EMR module. However, the design of such an EMR system, where it would play an additional role as a payment instrument, is currently not a priority for either software developers in the medical field, healthcare institutions, or clients, although this idea can be considered promising. The main and most important opportunity provided by this system is to create a single database that allows for quick access to the patient’s medical information in any medical organization (Lemon et al. 2019). It should be noted that the introduction of EMR satisfies the interests of all market participants: public health authorities, employees of medical organizations, insurance companies, and end-users of medical services.
Conclusion
Thus, it can be stated that the use of automated information systems in medical organizations that support the possibility of maintaining electronic medical records of patients leads to an increase in the quality of medical care provided. Moreover, it should be noted the productivity of employees due to the ease of use of the system and saving time on current operations. Other positive aspects can be reduced to an increase in the degree of customer satisfaction and, ultimately, an increase in the efficiency and competitiveness of the medical organization as a whole.
References
Lai, Y. S., & Afseth, J. D. (2019). A review of the impact of utilising electronic medical records for clinical research recruitment. Clinical Trials, 16(2), 194–203.
Lemon, C., De Ridder, M., & Khadra, M. (2019). Do electronic medical records improve advance directive documentation? A systematic review. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, 36(3), 255–263.