A recent report, published online inside New England Journal of Medicine, found out that doctors who use electronic health records (EHR) say overwhelmingly that such records have helped help the quality and timeliness of care. Yet fewer than one in five of the nation's doctors has started using such records. Most doctors in private practice, especially small practices, don't have the financial incentive to buy computerized records. In fact, only 8.6 percent of small practices (1-3 doctors) have started using EHR, as compared to 50 percent of large practices (over 50 doctors). The key reason behind slow EHR adoption rates seem to be economic: providers, already squeezed for reimbursement by payers, lack the financial incentive to generate a significant - frequently as high as $20,000 per doctor - investment in EHR, and undergo the painful and costly conversion process from paper. Experts agree that EHR will be adopted faster inside a consumer-driven medical care system, where innovation benefits the entrepreneurial provider. In the absence of a consumer-driven health care market, government entities, i. e. , the taxpayers, subsidize technological progress, shifting the system selection and pricing decision-making from medical care providers to bureaucrats. That decision-making today is difficult: 54 percent of doctors without EHR declared not finding an electric health record that met their requirements would be a major barrier" to adoption. Why doctors cannot find goods that meet their needs in a market saturated with 400 EMR vendors? Is it since these products are usually designed for hospitals - big customers - rather than small practices? A recent article in The New York Times ("Most Doctors Aren't Using Electronic Health Records") concludes with this testimonial: Do I see more patients because of this technology? Probably no, " Dr. Masucci said. But I am carrying out a better job with all the patients I am seeing. It almost forces you to be a better doctor. " Is it reasonable can be expected a technology to push one to be considered a better doctor or see more patients every day? Does the quantity of patients every day measure adequately medical quality as well as productivity? Does technology play this kind of ambitious role in other professions? Would you expect a journalist to convey similar to Do I write more articles as a consequence of Microsoft Word? Probably no. But I am conducting a better job with all the articles I publish. Microsoft Word almost can make you be described as a better journalist. " In a consumer-driven market, fewer patients would go to a practice that lacks modern documentation processes plus much more doctors would develop realistic business-driven requirements for EMR. The market would guide the EMR vendors along with the procedure for EMR adoption would become dramatically simpler and easier with regards to matching functionality, convenient conversion process, and affordable pricing. Know of medical billing companies or practice software vendors who complain about escalating competition, disloyal clients, or shrinking income? Help them learn winning Internet strategies for modern practice management challenges by steering these phones Vericle - All-in-One Billing and Practice Management Network, home of Practicing Profitability - Billing Network Effect for Revenue Cycle Control in Healthcare Clinics and Chiropractic Offices: Collections, Audit Risk, SOAP Notes, Scheduling, Care Plans, and Coding" book by Yuval Lirov, PhD and inventor of patents in artificial intelligence and computer security.