A recent study found that physicians who have EHRs are more likely to report adverse drug events than those who don't have computerized patient records.

Pharmaceutical company Pfizer sponsored the study, which was administered by independent market research firm Ipsos, to determine how it can improve patient safety with regard to its products. The study also helps the pharmaceutical company understand how EHRs can be used to aggregate information on the appropriate use of its products.

The study broke down the 300 respondents into three camps: physicians using paper-based records, physicians who use basic functionality of their EHRs and physicians who have fully functioning EHRs. One-third used paper-based records, and the rest use EHRs. Half of the respondents, which included 60 percent of the fully functional EHR users, indicated that they would be much more likely to submit adverse-events data via an EHR system.

The electronic version of completing the adverse event reporting process takes minutes compared to the 40 minutes for the paper-based process, which creates a great incentive for physicians to use this component of an EHR system. While the results of the study are promising, it's incumbent on healthcare IT vendors and pharma to continue to refine this component to make it even more user-friendly and to seamlessly fit into the physician's workflow. Physicians already acknowledge that adverse event reporting delivers patient safety benefits; making the electronic process better will drive greater adoption of the component and increase overall EHR functionality.

As the study pointed out, 80 percent of the respondents who use paper-based records cited cost as a major barrier to implementing an EHR. One hopes the federal funding and loans can tear down that barrier. As the funds flow to the physicians, healthcare IT vendors need to keep building a better mousetrap.