Introduction
Although Canada is a developed country, it lacks a comprehensive electronic health records system. The country continues to lag behind its OECD peers such as the UK and the US, which have successfully adopted electronic health records systems (Rodrigues, 2009). This paper will analyze the factors that contribute to slow adoption of the electronic health records system in Canada. Specifically, it will highlight the factors that account for the poor state of Ontario’s electronic health records system.
Discussion
Ontario is one of the provinces in Canada that are lagging behind in the process of adopting the electronic health records system. The factors that account for the low achievement include the following. First, the slow pace of adoption and the ineffectiveness of Ontario’s electronic health records system are explained by poor planning of the implementation process. Ontario never had a strategic plan to implement the electronic health records system when the project was initiated in early 1990s (Auditor General, 2010). The province developed its strategic plan to implement the system nearly a decade later in 2009. Furthermore, eHealth Ontario was created in 2008 to oversee the process of implementing the system (Jenna, 2012). This delay implies that the government of Ontario implemented the electronic health records system in a haphazard manner, thereby suffering significant setbacks in terms of poor quality and resistance from care providers. Failure has also been witnessed in provinces such as Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia, where there were no strategic plans to guide adoption and use of electronic health records (Auditor General, 2010). Alberta and British Columbia, which are among the leading provinces in effective use of electronic health records, had strategic plans at the beginning of their projects. In Prince Edward Island, the government had a strategic plan at the beginning of the project. However, the plan was never updated to take into account emerging needs (Auditor General, 2010). This led to low adoption rate and poor project outcomes.
Second, the slow pace of adopting electronic health records in Ontario is explained by utilization of poor management practices and lack of accountability (Auditor General, 2010). Specifically, implementation of the electronic health records system has experienced setbacks due to the government’s failure to closely monitor key areas such as the project’s expenditures, quality standards, and scope. As a result, corruption led to misuse of the funds that were meant for the implementation of the project. For instance, between 2002 and 2008 the Smart System for Health Agency utilized eight hundred million dollars to develop an electronic health records system for medical practitioners in the province (Jenna, 2012). However, the funds were wasted because the system has never been used. In a nutshell, misuse of funds limited the resources that were required to accelerate adoption of electronic health records in Ontario. Prince Edward Island succeeded because it used best management practices that led to identification of bottlenecks between 2005 and 2007 (Auditor General, 2010). Consequently, the government was able to take timely corrective measures. Similarly, British Columbia and Nova Scotia succeeded because they closely monitored the costs, quality, and timeliness of their projects to avoid failure.
Third, Ontario is lagging behind in utilization of electronic health records because of inadequate incentives to motivate physicians to adopt the system. By contrast, the government of Alberta started providing financial assistance to care providers as early as 2001 to digitize health records. This involved reimbursing care providers up to 70% of the costs associated with adopting the electronic health records system (Rodrigues, 2009). In addition, the government provided technical support to ensure that the systems adopted by the care providers met the required standards in terms of security, ease of access, and cost-efficiency. In Ontario, the government started providing little financial support in 2009 (Jenna, 2012). Thus, healthcare providers in Ontario are reluctant to adopt the system due to the high cost of acquiring it. In addition, the care providers who have adopted the system are grappling with high maintenance costs.
Finally, physicians in Ontario are reluctant to utilize electronic health records because of inadequate training on how the system works (Jenna, 2012). This problem is exacerbated by the fact that physicians are using different types of electronic health records systems, which makes it difficult to share patients’ information (Jena, 2012). By contrast, Newfoundland-Labrador succeeded because it had an extensive training program for its physicians to enhance adoption and use of electronic health records. This motivated physicians to shift from manual to electronic health records.
Conclusion
The rate of adoption of electronic health records in Canada is low because most of its provinces are using ineffective strategies to implement the system. Ontario is one of the provinces with the lowest adoption rates. The factors that account for the poor achievement in Ontario include poor planning, limited use of best management practices, and lack of adequate training. In addition, the government has failed to incentivize healthcare providers to adopt the system.
References
Auditor General. (2010). Electronic health records in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Auditor General of Canada.
Jenna, E. (2012). Politics matters: Implementing electronic health records in Canada. Toronto, Canada: Unversity of Toronto.
Rodrigues, J. (2009). Health Information Systems: Concepts, Methodologies, and Tools. New York, NY: IGI Global.