Skip to content
MarketScale
‹ Back to IndustriesHealthcare

How Patients View EHRs: The Pros and the Cons

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) have been implemented by health practices around the world to increase productivity, efficiency, and success. Many physicians agree that EHRs have increased practice efficiency while improving patient care, but what do the patients think? While the development and implementation of electronic health records remains a challenge, understanding patient and public attitudes…

This story was produced through MarketScale. See how Healthcare teams put it to work with Executive Thought Leadership.

Share

Get featured

Want to get featured in MarketScale Healthcare?

Create a free MarketScale workspace and get your company's expertise featured across our Healthcare coverage. No credit card, no demo required.

Request an invite

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) have been implemented by health practices around the world to increase productivity, efficiency, and success. Many physicians agree that EHRs have increased practice efficiency while improving patient care, but what do the patients think? While the development and implementation of electronic health records remains a challenge, understanding patient and public attitudes inform future EHR advancements.

Patient and Public Perceptions

Exploring patient and public views of EHRs provides areas of improvement within health care provision, planning and policy, and health research. While many people have a positive outlook on this technology, many also have concerns. Let’s take a look at findings from a January 2019 KFF Health Tracking poll which examines the public’s attitudes about and experiences with EHRs.

Quality of Care

  • 88% of the public reported that their physician currently uses an EHR, nearly doubling the number of physicians (46%) who had implemented a computer-based medical record in their practice a decade ago.
  • Of that percentage, 45% state that the use of an EHR has increased the quality of care provided by their physician, 47% reported the quality of care remained the same, and only 6% said their physician’s use of an EHR made the quality of care worse. The breakdown per age groups: 57% of adults between the age of 18-29 reported their quality of care is better with none saying their quality of care is worse with an EHR 43% of adults between the age of 30-49 reported their quality of care is better with only 6% reporting worse quality of care with an EHR 44% of adults between the age of 50-64 reported their quality of care is better while only 9% say an EHR has negatively affected their quality of care 41% of adults over the age of 65 reported their quality of care is better while only 8% citing worse quality of care with an EHR
  • As it pertains to an EHR’s impact on the quality of the physician/patient interaction, of the 88% who reported that their physician currently used an EHR, a total of 44% reported an improvement with only 7% reporting a decrease in interaction quality. The breakdown per age groups: 49% of adults between the age of 18-29 reported their physician/patient interaction is better with only 1% saying that interaction is worse with an EHR 41% of adults between the age of 30-49 reported better quality interaction with only 9% reporting worse quality 43% of adults between the age of 50-64 reported better interaction while only 10% say an EHR has negatively affected interaction quality 44% of adults over the age of 65 reported better quality of physician interaction with only 9% saying an EHR has adversely affected interaction

Privacy and Errors

  • Although slightly decreased from the 60% who reported feeling concerned in 2016, 54% of the public today still feel “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” of unauthorized access to their confidential medical records and personal information.
  • While 54% reported feeling “not too concerned” or “not at all concerned”, nearly half (45%) did report feeling “very” or “somewhat” concerned that errors in their personal health information may negatively affect their care; yet, only 21% reported that they or a family member had discovered a mistake in their EHR. A breakdown of the error types: 9% incorrect medical history 5% incorrect personal information 3% incorrect lab or test results 3% incorrect medication information Less than 1%, a billing issue.

EHR Pros and Cons

While concern levels differ from age group to age group, overall, the patients of physicians with an EHR in place are reporting favorable results as it pertains to care and interaction quality. However, there are still key concerns as it relates to the access of a patient’s private health and/or personal information, as well as errors in that information that may negatively affect their care. As such, several pros and cons must be considered.

On the pros side, research shows that physicians who use EHRs not only follow accepted treatment guidelines better, but also have a lower rate of medication mistakes—a huge pro! Also, via an EHR with a user-friendly patient portal, patients can quickly and easily access lab results, shot records, medical histories, and more, enabling superior patient-physician transparency to promote better health while allowing patients to identify errors themselves and make corrections more rapidly than previous methods—bonus, bonus, bonus! Further, if all of a patient’s doctors, hospitals, and labs can share health information in real-time via digital technology, they can work more effectively as a team and easily remain apprised of a patients’ illnesses, treatments, and surgeries—a crucial plus!

On the cons side, however, since most people typically see more than one doctor, they likely have multiple records and patient portals in existence. Unless all of those doctors are under one healthcare system, the chances are that interoperability between each physician’s EHR may be hindered, making the compiling of all medical history into a single EHR unfeasible. Further, these inconsistencies in EHRs from doctor to doctor pose a personal and medical information security risk, providing hackers with multiple points to probe. Yet, although interoperability may currently be hampered, a reining healthcare goal is to create an all-encompassing EHR that not only enables inner-practice accessibility, but also alleviates cyberthreats.

Importance of EHR Advancements

Physician-patient communication is a crucial element in health care delivery, directly affecting patient satisfaction, adherence, rapport, and trust. While electronic health record technology is not perfect as of yet, these statistics show that most patients feel it has definitely improved both the quality of care and physician interactions over the past ten years. This understanding into how patients view their physician’s use of EHRs provides essential information for developments in the greater use of the technology.

Your experts belong here

Every story in MarketScale Healthcare starts with a company putting its clinicians, service-line leaders, and field engineers on the record. Buyers are already reading this topic. The only question is whose experts they find.

Service-line buyers vet vendors quietly, and your clinicians become the proof they find while doing it.

Get your team featuredSee how it works15 minutes, straight to a calendar.

Follow Healthcare Insights

Get new expert content in your inbox.

Healthcare: are you visible to AI?

Before they reach out, Healthcare buyers ask AI engines which vendors to trust. See how AI describes your company today, and where competitors show up instead.

Free workspace

You just read one Healthcare expert. Your company is full of them.

This article was produced through MarketScale. The same platform turns your clinicians, service-line leaders, and field engineers into the articles, video, and social content Healthcare buyers are searching for. Create a free workspace and see it with your own people. No credit card, no demo required.

NPS +73 · 1,000+ creators · 38+ countries

What you get, free

Your own MarketScale Studio workspace
One video edit a month, on us
AI writing, editing, and publishing tools
In-platform coaching to learn the system

More Healthcare Insights

Dental practice exits are turning into multi-year projects, not last-year decisions

Dental practice exits are turning into multi-year projects, not last-year decisions

Dental practice exits now take 3–5+ years of prep. Dental Economics says associate-to-buyout timelines often run three to five-plus years. That pushes revenue-cycle controls, buy-sell terms, and tax structure earlier, before a buyer appears.

  • 01A practical benchmark is emerging for succession: bringing in an associate with intent to buy can take a minimum of three years and often more than five, according to Dental Economics.
  • 02If accounts receivable looks “high,” it may be a bookkeeping and posting problem before it is a payer problem, a revenue-cycle diagnostic Group Dentistry Now says shows up frequently at scale.
  • 03Exit planning is now an operating system project: valuation, tax positioning, and transition support belong in the same workstream, because deal structure can lock in or foreclose tax options, per Dental Economics.

Sep 4, 2026

Scan.com’s $220M round makes imaging an API contract for plans and employers

Scan.com’s $220M round makes imaging an API contract for plans and employers

Scan.com closed $220 million in equity and debt. It’s expanding its U.S. imaging network plus API-based scheduling and results delivery. For health plans and employers, imaging is starting to look like a platform procurement and integration decision, not a directory problem.

  • 01If imaging access is bought via an API, the real spec becomes integration depth: two-way scheduling plus results routing into the EMR, according to Business Wire.
  • 02Scan.com’s mix of $90M equity and $130M debt earmarked for M&A and working capital points to a fast-changing imaging provider network, which can help access but demands discipline in contracting and integration testing.
  • 03The same week’s funding news for Elucid ($55M) suggests AI imaging vendors will keep pushing toward FDA-cleared workflow insertions, a different buying path than network-layer platforms.

Sep 4, 2026

MD&M West 2026 exhibitors pitch audit-ready, AI-ready device platforms

MD&M West 2026 exhibitors pitch audit-ready, AI-ready device platforms

MD&M West 2026 exhibitor messaging suggests compliance testing and AI-ready compute are becoming early decisions, not afterthoughts. Medical Economics described 2026 as a period shaped by rapid technological change, regulatory scrutiny and ongoing economic uncertainty. Medical Design & Outsourcing’s MD&M West 2026 preview points to exhibitors highlighting test equipment, contract manufacturing and other launch support services.

  • 01If a device roadmap includes AI features, the critical path shifts toward data and software evidence that regulators can audit, which means earlier lock-in of compute platforms and test plans, pulling verification and validation into supplier selection.
  • 02MD&M West exhibitor messaging suggests verification and validation capacity is becoming a procurement problem, with rentals and lab-ready gear positioned as a way to avoid booking delays and re-tests, according to Medical Design & Outsourcing.
  • 03With imaging and other new procedural and device concepts moving fast, manufacturing leaders should expect more frequent line-change decisions and component qualification work, as GE HealthCare's photon-counting CT CE mark reported by MedTech Dive and MDDI's New Technologies coverage illustrate.

Sep 3, 2026

Explore More Healthcare Insights

Read more expert perspectives from across Healthcare.

Browse Healthcare Hub

For B2B teams

Your experts could be publishing here

Stories like this one run on content MarketScale captures from real practitioners. See how your team's expertise becomes coverage in Healthcare and beyond.

Book a 15-minute demo

Or call us. No forms required. We pick up. 214-945-2512