How far will the saga of investment in electronic health records help the USA? Well, it seems that the federal government has firm conviction in this and considers that its enactment will change the scenario forever. Is it so? Can this ever be? It is quite difficult to predict the fate at this juncture but it is also true that many fail to conform to this. On the contrary, they are not only skeptical of the entire prospect but also believe it as a sheer wastage of money.

Take for instance the recent verbal expression of a Harvard professor in the Washington Post. On the word of the professor, any form of investment in electronic health records is a bad bet for improving quality of care and lowering medical costs. Who are these professors? They happen to be Stephen Soumerai, a Professor of Ambulatory Care and Prevention at Harvard Medical School, and Sumit R. Majumdar, an Associate Professor of Medicine at the University of Alberta. Both have failed to share the optimistic views of the government in this regard and consider that Obama’s proposal to expend $50 billion over five years for the promotion of health information technology, including $20 billion for electronic records may fail to yield any fruit.

As indicated by the professors, the benefits of health IT have been greatly exaggerated and state, “While this sort of reform has popular support, there is little evidence that currently available computerized systems will improve care.” “In short, it’s the wrong investment to make at this time.”

They also say, “For many chronically ill and vulnerable patients, it does not matter much whether their health records are digital or their prescriptions typed.” “Without patient access to clinicians and adequate health insurance that includes affordable drug coverage, a $50 billion investment in health information technology won’t do much for many Americans.”

Will it be wrong to state that Obama may face new challenges in this sector too? Perhaps not!