tkilpat1

UTD-TK I agree with UTDGC in that interoperability is still functional without standardizing things across the spectrum in regards to communication. This is a hypothetical solution attempting to take something that is good and make it better. Even in today's communication, there are set standards that are not followed. Standards of interoperability are important; however, not everything has to be regulated for a machine with many cogs and wheels to work. An EMR is not the end all be all of medical communication, as the care provider can always verbally communicate with another discipline to clear up an issue. Even with standards that are strict, there will still be questions that need to be asked and those who do not understand all of the in-s and out-s of the EMR. Human error will always be a factor in communication, but how we can reduce that as a healthcare community remains to be seen.

UTD-TK Laurinemory, I agree with your Geriatric patient population point. Often times we see patients who have extensive medical histories. Maintaining a clear and concise format pertaining to each condition so that different caregivers can be on the same page is crucial in providing quality care to each client to the best of the healthcare team's abilities. Mapping, as defined by Sewell, consolidates all of the data about clients so that every discipline can understand exactly the plan of care (Sewell & Thede, 2013, p. 269). As healthcare evolves, so will the quality of communication between disciplines. Sewell, J., & Thede, L.Q. (2013) Informatics and nursing: Opportunities and challenges.(4th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.