There are challenges and advantages in being first to present.  Among the challenges are a shorter timeline in which to prepare and not having the opportunity to see how others interpret the direction.  There are an equal number of advantages; as the first presenters, we were tasked with setting the precedence for our colleagues.  Ultimately, I was pleased with the outcome of our debate.
The debate around electronic health records (EHRs) is very timely.  It is an issue that we see almost daily in the news and witness firsthand in healthcare facilities.  The argument ‘for’ EHRs was relatively easy to construct.  There is a wealth of information on the subject and a variety of opinions.  Not working in healthcare presently, I am nonetheless fascinated by the debate.  As a healthcare consumer, I am invested in the outcome of the work to have EHRs implemented in all healthcare institutions.  As a government employee, I am committed to public accountability and providing the best possible, evidence-informed advice to political staff.  As a Master of Health Studies (MHST) student, I have a keen interest in the future of healthcare and how we will sustain our current system with an aging population and a fiscal reality that does not allow for the growth we have seen in the past.
Throughout the MHST program, I have had several opportunities to work in partnership with other students.  While geography can pose challenges, I have never thought it to be an insurmountable obstacle.  Lisa and I worked well together and were able to provide one another with insight into how the debate should proceed.  One of the biggest obstacles was simultaneously researching a topic while learning how to format and structure a debate.  If I had to do the debate over again, I would have spent more time learning about debate protocol and discussing the construction of the debate with my partner.  Having said this, I was pleased with the end result and found the presentation to have a consistent appearance with parallel subheadings.  This resulted in a debate that was easy to follow.
I felt our classmates were engaged in the topic and that in the end, both ‘for’ and ‘against’ were arguing for the same thing: an evidence-informed plan, with adequate funding and timelines, to implement a sustainable EHR system.  Consideration to privacy issues must be included in a comprehensive plan, but I believe that as healthcare practitioners, we know that EHRs have benefits that cannot be experienced with paper records.  We clearly must learn from past errors (both in Canada and abroad) and move forward towards a truly integrated system.
Upon reflection, I feel the debate accomplished what it was meant to.  Our colleagues are now better informed on the issues surrounding EHRs and better able to argue for or against the implementation of EHRs at their institutions.  The debate was well planned and though Lisa and I may h