Did you know that a majority of US-based behavioural health providers don’t use electronic health record systems (EHR)? It’s true. Now, the US government wants to give them money to update their practice. Here’s the update:
Lawmakers have introduced a new bill called the Behavioral Health Information Technology (BHIT) Coordination Act that aims to provide funding for EHR adoption to behavioural health providers. The bill would allocate $20 million per year over 5 years that providers could use to purchase, upgrade, or support health IT systems. Unlike other health providers, behavioural health providers have lagged in EHR adoption because they were excluded from the 2009 HITECH Act funding. Currently, only about 46% of psychiatric hospitals use EHRs compared to 95% of general medicine practices. The bill seeks to address this disparity and the high costs that have prevented implementation. Industry leaders support the bill, arguing it will improve patient care, provider satisfaction, patient safety, and enable breakthrough treatments. Eligible providers include psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, and mental health/substance use facilities. Proponents say funding EHRs for behavioral health is long overdue and will exponentially assist efforts to treat conditions like depression, PTSD, and addiction.
Whilst this sounds great to some, there is opposition.
Cost - Opponents argue that $20 million per year is not enough to incentivize widespread EHR adoption and the costs to implement these systems are still prohibitively high for many behavioural health providers. They of course want more funding allocated.
Privacy/Security - Critics express concerns about putting sensitive mental health records into EHR systems and worry about potential breaches, especially with smaller providers who have limited resources to secure systems.
Unproven benefits - Some argue the benefits of EHRs for behavioural health are still unproven and dispute claims it will lead to breakthrough treatments. They may want to see more evidence before incentivizing adoption.
Market competition - Opponents argue this may discourage market competition and innovation if the government is picking “winners” by subsidizing certain EHR systems over others.
Sustainability - There are questions around what happens when the funding runs out after 5 years. Some may argue a short-term subsidy won't lead to long-term, sustained use of EHRs.
Priority - Some argue behavioural health is already underfunded and this money could be better spent on other needs, like expanding treatment capacity and improving access.
What do you think. Will EHRs in behavioural health lead to better outcomes for autistic people seeking care? Or, is the money (which the US doesn’t really have) better spent elsewhere, like a Universal Basic Income for autistic people? Let me know in the comments below.
The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
None of my nurse and physician friends have anything good to say about electronic medical records. These programs were created by non medical professionals and are not user friendly, resulting in hours of extra work in documentation. A friend recently was hospitalized for an abscess in his abdomen, and a drain was placed. The drain was supposed to be flushed every four hours, and it didn’t happen at all for four days because the order was hidden under several layers of records. He could have died. He had to stay in the hospital longer because this hadn’t been taken care of. Seems like the Universal Basic Income for autistics would be a better way to spend money.
None of my nurse and physician friends have anything good to say about electronic medical records. These programs were created by non medical professionals and are not user friendly, resulting in hours of extra work in documentation. A friend recently was hospitalized for an abscess in his abdomen, and a drain was placed. The drain was supposed to be flushed every four hours, and it didn’t happen at all for four days because the order was hidden under several layers of records. He could have died. He had to stay in the hospital longer because this hadn’t been taken care of. Seems like the Universal Basic Income for autistics would be a better way to spend money.