There are technological, economic, privacy, patient and provider barriers. A technological barrier to the adoption of PHRs is the challenge of interface and interoperability amongst all of the various EHR systems in use. As there are not yet ubiquitous standards across all EMRs, or even adoption of EMRs across all care settings, PHRs will be extremely challenged to truly have the ability to plug and play with the various EMRs used by health systems and individual providers. Additionally, PHRs may be seen as a threat to health care providers as they could perceive them as a challenge to their control, autonomy and authority in the traditional patient-provider relationship (Tang et al., 2006). Providers have been adjusting to patients having more access to information (both accurate and inaccurate) and taking a more active role in their health over the last decade with the advent quick and easy access to health information on the internet. This has changed the patient-provider relationship greatly, PHRs are a natural extension this process in treating patients as an equal partner and owner of their health, rather than someone who just blindly follows instructions. To continue this progression of the relationship through the use of PHRs, patients will have to develop trust that providers will use and secure the information shared with them and providers will have to trust patients to input accurate information into the PHRs. I find it interesting how frequently providers worry that patients will lie on validated health screening questionnaires and other tools, but yet seem less concerned that patient will lie when asked the same question. We have probably all lied to our providers at one time or another, and research shows that patients are actually more honest when completing questionnaires in private rather than when asked by a provider (Yigletu, Tucker, Harris, & Hatlevig, 2004).
There are technological, economic, privacy, patient and provider barriers. A technological barrier to the adoption of PHRs is the challenge of interface and interoperability amongst all of the various EHR systems in use. As there are not yet ubiquitous standards across all EMRs, or even adoption of EMRs across all care settings, PHRs will be extremely challenged to truly have the ability to plug and play with the various EMRs used by health systems and individual providers. Additionally, PHRs may be seen as a threat to health care providers as they could perceive them as a challenge to their control, autonomy and authority in the traditional patient-provider relationship (Tang et al., 2006). Providers have been adjusting to patients having more access to information (both accurate and inaccurate) and taking a more active role in their health over the last decade with the advent quick and easy access to health information on the internet. This has changed the patient-provider relationship greatly, PHRs are a natural extension this process in treating patients as an equal partner and owner of their health, rather than someone who just blindly follows instructions. To continue this progression of the relationship through the use of PHRs, patients will have to develop trust that providers will use and secure the information shared with them and providers will have to trust patients to input accurate information into the PHRs. I find it interesting how frequently providers worry that patients will lie on validated health screening questionnaires and other tools, but yet seem less concerned that patient will lie when asked the same question. We have probably all lied to our providers at one time or another, and research shows that patients are actually more honest when completing questionnaires in private rather than when asked by a provider (Yigletu, Tucker, Harris, & Hatlevig, 2004).