There has been a lot of talk the last few years about meaningful use rules and technical requirements relating to EHRs, but commentators are increasingly saying that practices would do better to think about how the technology will benefit their ability to provide high-quality patient care first, and consider government regulations second.

Debra Beaulieu, a columnist at Fierce Practice Management, recently pointed out that EHRs existed prior to the government's meaningful use program and many practices adopted the technology simply as a way to improve the quality of care they delivered. Incentives had nothing to do with it.

"With no direct financial incentives and the steep challenge to get physicians even to consider switching to the technology, [early adopters] were motivated by an overarching goal to improve their workflow and better serve their patients," Beaulieu wrote.

She is among a growing number of commentators calling for a greater focus on the quality improvements associated with EHR adoptions. Michael Barr, the senior vice president of the Division of Medical Practice, Professionalism and Quality at the American College of Physicians, recently made similar comments, saying that quality measures should be a central part of the next stage of meaningful use.