19 March 2012
ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS
Nowadays, a person can sit down in front of a computer and find out a great deal about almost anything, from finding a video about cooking to learning how the people live around the world. However, there is one thing Americans cannot have access on any computer, their own health records. Today, almost all physicians still work with paper records which are put in a file folder and inaccessible to anyone outside the office. If a patient goes to a facility for a mammogram, an X-ray, or a scan of some type, that record is now stored digitally, but these records are often stored in a form that is unique to that facility and are not available to others. Therefore, converting paper medical records to electronic ones is one of the most controversial debates in the United States health care industry. An article titled “Federal Health Care IT Spending Set to Grow” from The Washington Post, written by Angela Petty, discusses opportunities for health care information technology (IT) due to the projected increase in developing digital medical records in federal health care IT market. In addition, The Wall Street Journal published the article “Should Every Patient Have a Unique ID Number for All Medical Record?” by Michael F. Collins and Deborah C. Peel on the advantages and disadvantages of converting to universal electronic health records. Although the authors of two publications address the same topic of electronic medical records, the articles are written differently, based on the intended audience of each publication.
The audience of The Washington Post has a different reading level compared to The Wall Street Journal readers. The article in The Washington Post is written in a way that anyone with a basic reading level would understand because the author uses words and vocabulary from daily life such as “money tight” (par.1), “health care cost” (par.3),...