Thursday, December 26, 2013
Kevin Jones
Thursday 26 December 2013
Friday 20 January 2012
Your requirements of the EMR Software
A first idea here is the fact that this is a cost effective system when it comes to various factors from the space that it occupies to the amount of time that it takes a doctor to reach the information that he or she needs. The use of the Electronic Medical Records system has managed to increase the efficiency of the work that doctors do. This is because of the fact that there are many cases in which the doctor needs to reach particular information on a person in a split of a second as the life of that one is in their hands. That is one of the main reasons why the system needs to be super effective and it needs to have an extremely quick response time. Another aspect that can be illustrated here refers to the idea of space management.
The computers allow the users to store as much information as they want, especially in the case where patient's files don't take up that much of space. There was a time where the information that doctors had on patients were stored in files. That was extremely complicated even though there were many filing system. Imagine a huge hospital and a room where they keep all the files on their patients. The job of finding the needed information was very complicated. But with the use of the the Electronic Medical Records system, doctors can rest assured as things are delivered extremely fast. A last idea here refers to the issue of security. Many people, especially elder ones, are reticent when it comes to using computers because of the fact that they have heard that they can be tampered with. This is a legit problem, but the developers have taken this aspect into account and thought of various ways to protect the data inside. One of the most relevant ways to be certain of who accesses the information is the fact that the introducing of data and deleting it is done by restricted personnel only. This means that there is only a limited number of people who can use the the Electronic Medical Records system in order to introduce or erase certain details. In this way, things can be monitored and observed. There are still many other things that can be said here on how important it is to implement the the Electronic Medical Records system in any medical facility. It's all about letting technology work in the benefit of humankind and that is one of the best arguments there are here. People should use any available tools in order to enhance their personal or professional lives.
Source:- http://www.amazines.com/article_detail.cfm/3810302?articleid=3810302
The computers allow the users to store as much information as they want, especially in the case where patient's files don't take up that much of space. There was a time where the information that doctors had on patients were stored in files. That was extremely complicated even though there were many filing system. Imagine a huge hospital and a room where they keep all the files on their patients. The job of finding the needed information was very complicated. But with the use of the the Electronic Medical Records system, doctors can rest assured as things are delivered extremely fast. A last idea here refers to the issue of security. Many people, especially elder ones, are reticent when it comes to using computers because of the fact that they have heard that they can be tampered with. This is a legit problem, but the developers have taken this aspect into account and thought of various ways to protect the data inside. One of the most relevant ways to be certain of who accesses the information is the fact that the introducing of data and deleting it is done by restricted personnel only. This means that there is only a limited number of people who can use the the Electronic Medical Records system in order to introduce or erase certain details. In this way, things can be monitored and observed. There are still many other things that can be said here on how important it is to implement the the Electronic Medical Records system in any medical facility. It's all about letting technology work in the benefit of humankind and that is one of the best arguments there are here. People should use any available tools in order to enhance their personal or professional lives.
Source:- http://www.amazines.com/article_detail.cfm/3810302?articleid=3810302
Friday 13 January 2012
EMR Software reviews from Doctor for ePrescribing
As doctors race to the finish line for attestation of meaningful use, one EMR vendor has revamped their ePrescribing feature to help doctors get the most reimbursement amount possible. Voted as the best EMR software by Brown-Wilson’s Black Booking Ranking survey for their ePrescribe function, Practice Fusion simplified and streamlined their free ePrescribe software to make attestation an easier endeavor.
By not charging doctors for the software service, Practice Fusion feels that doctors are able to maximize reimbursement without making a big investment. The changes made include pre-populated patient prescription histories and a drug and allergy interaction alert screen for clinical decision support. To improve doctor workflow, the number of click-through screens to complete a prescription was reduced in half and features an improved faster search for commonly prescribed drugs.
The best EMR software company’s ePrescribing system conversion was based on the feedback response of doctors who are already familiar with Practice Fusion. "It's a new year and we are focused on developing new free technology that saves lives, while delivering a great experience every time a doctor signs on," said Ryan Howard, CEO and Founder of Practice Fusion. "Even one less click means physicians can spend more time focusing on the patient and delivering quality care."
Source: http://www.healthtechnologyreview.com/news395_best_emr_software_for_eprescribing_gets_doctored_up.php
Tuesday 10 January 2012
Meaningful use finally working or not?
Those in Healthcare IT can stand as a witness to what I’m about to tell you, because you all lived it right along side of me. When the Obama administration passed the HITECH Act as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus bill) of 2009 on February 18th of that year, it was supposed to give the industry providing IT for healthcare offices in America an economic boost. From that bill, the term “Meaningful Use” was born, which is used to define how a medical practice meets the government set standards of automation, connectivity, and digitization. Nearly a year and a half later, in July of 2010, the final requirements and definitions for the first stage of “Meaningful Use” were finally established. What occurred during those nearly 18-months could actually be described as a ‘de-stimulus.’ Many medical practices, who may have been in the market for new medical software or hardware at the end of 2007, decided to take a wait and see approach on the stimulus before making any buying decisions. Many medical-related companies, like Midmark, declared a hiring freeze during those months as they prepared for change. My consulting business struggled; No EHR companies were willing to shell out dollars to implement new sales programs when no one was buying anyway. So for 18-months it felt as if the entire industry neither grew nor shrank; we just maintained.
Fast forward another year and a half later to December 2011. Would the next 18-months of Meaningful Use make more of an impact? At a November 2011 meeting with two VPs from NextGen, they reported to me that they were “starting to see some movement.” One VP went on to say that “Physicians have been waiting to see if other physicians would actually get checks. Now that the checks are coming in, more physicians are making a move.” From New York, the National Sales Director for OmniMD reported in a recent meeting that they have “well over a hundred physicians slated to receive their Meaningful Use checks.”
And it seems to be making a difference, especially in certain parts of the country. A couple weeks ago CMS released a table showing total Meaningful Use payments through November 7th to physicians by state (see below). Surprisingly or not, Texas and Louisiana have been the quickest to adopt EHRs and demonstrate Meaningful Use, getting over $75 million in additional reimbursement payments. While physicians and hospitals in Oklahoma, Florida, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky filled out the next tier or states getting between $50-75 Million per state. North Dakota was the only state reported to get $0 in Meaningful Use money.
I called several Healthcare IT resellers around the country to find out if their experience on the front lines of EHR implementation was any different than what I was hearing from the vendors. Lee Orsag, the President of Altex Business Solutions in Houston and who is also on the board of directors for McKesson Physician Practice Solutions Division, expressed that they’ve “had a banner year in Texas.” This supports the CMS Incentives Programs Table; however, he went on to add that, “We attribute the good year to the 5010 mandate for electronic claims, which has required software upgrades for all of our physicians. Meaningful Use has had very little impact on our business; however, we’re finding that many software companies have been subsidizing physician’s purchase of EHRs in Houston which has likely impacted the CMS numbers.”
Fast forward another year and a half later to December 2011. Would the next 18-months of Meaningful Use make more of an impact? At a November 2011 meeting with two VPs from NextGen, they reported to me that they were “starting to see some movement.” One VP went on to say that “Physicians have been waiting to see if other physicians would actually get checks. Now that the checks are coming in, more physicians are making a move.” From New York, the National Sales Director for OmniMD reported in a recent meeting that they have “well over a hundred physicians slated to receive their Meaningful Use checks.”
And it seems to be making a difference, especially in certain parts of the country. A couple weeks ago CMS released a table showing total Meaningful Use payments through November 7th to physicians by state (see below). Surprisingly or not, Texas and Louisiana have been the quickest to adopt EHRs and demonstrate Meaningful Use, getting over $75 million in additional reimbursement payments. While physicians and hospitals in Oklahoma, Florida, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky filled out the next tier or states getting between $50-75 Million per state. North Dakota was the only state reported to get $0 in Meaningful Use money.
I called several Healthcare IT resellers around the country to find out if their experience on the front lines of EHR implementation was any different than what I was hearing from the vendors. Lee Orsag, the President of Altex Business Solutions in Houston and who is also on the board of directors for McKesson Physician Practice Solutions Division, expressed that they’ve “had a banner year in Texas.” This supports the CMS Incentives Programs Table; however, he went on to add that, “We attribute the good year to the 5010 mandate for electronic claims, which has required software upgrades for all of our physicians. Meaningful Use has had very little impact on our business; however, we’re finding that many software companies have been subsidizing physician’s purchase of EHRs in Houston which has likely impacted the CMS numbers.”
Bob Miller, a McKesson Lytec reseller in Wisconsin said that he just closed his first EMR sale this month and that installation was scheduled for January 2012. “Trying to get my doctors to switch over had been near impossible.” He went on to add, “Meaningful Use is the key.”
However, reports in every state are not all positive. New Mexico is currently among the lowest states for receiving Meaningful Use money. Joann Ahner, a Medisoft reseller in New Mexico expressed that many of her physicians are still fearful about implementing a new EHR system right now. She went on to say, “Medicaid reimbursements have been cut significantly in New Mexico. Doctors don’t feel they have the money to invest in an EMR system and are also worried the higher Meaningful Use Medicaid reimbursements won’t cover the overall EHR costs.”
And there is no doubt, based on the latest CMS report, that many areas of the country are not taking full advantage of the Meaningful Use opportunity. Cyndee Weston, the Executive Director and founder of the American Medical Billing Association, had her take on why many parts of the U.S. are not fully participating: “Some doctors are just tired of all the Medicare requirements. Even providers who have an EMR aren’t trying to obtain the Meaningful Use money, partially because they got an EHR to improve efficiency and partially because they don’t do enough Medicare billing to make the hassle worth the extra money. And with all of the penalties coming about, the doctor’s we are working with are saying they may just stop taking Medicare all together.“
So the Meaningful Use answer then begs the question: How wise is it to drive EHR adoption by a “supply push” instead of a “demand pull?” William Johns, of the National Provider Network, expressed this very concern in a recent e-mail to me: "It seems to me there are too many minimum-standard EHR systems surviving on incentives instead of quality. This strategy did not work for General Motors and it won’t work for these IT providers either. EHR adoption should be desired by all physicians and not just because they are paid to do it. To get to that goal we should focus on what the providers and other users including front desk, assistants and billers want in their EHR."
Lee Orsag in Houston summarized the Meaningful Use quandary best when he said to me: “For many physicians, getting an EHR to get stimulus funds is sort of like a set of parents having a baby to get a tax write-off. It’s not a legitimate reason.”
So is Meaningful Use working? Perhaps it would be if there were a greater focus on provider EHR needs and usability? Perhaps if Meaningful Use maintained a focus on the importance of professional training and support we could say definitively that it was working? Those who have kids know that the only reason to have a baby has nothing to do with taxes or government, and everything about improving the quality of life for their families. Likewise, the only reason a physician office should implement an EHR is because it improves the quality of patient care and the lives of the people who work there. Any EHR that can do that is worth considering, regardless of Meaningful Use dollars.
Thursday 5 January 2012
Best EMR Software
Tom EMR software is something that many medical offices are looking into. While this is still a fairly new production in terms of medical offices switching over to EMR from paper records, there is starting to be some major competition for this service. These programs are put out by several different top software distributors and they all have their own brand of benefits and services they can offer you. You'll notice as you start looking through this information that there are programs specifically helpful for small practices and for large clinics as well.
Hospitals of course will have their own needs that the top EMR software can take care of in order to ensure not only patient safety but also efficiency. Whether the environment has a few beds or several, it will still be held to the standards of health care overall both legally and following the Hippocratic Oath. If they don't, they can find themselves in serious trouble, up to and including the loss of their license to practice. In order to avoid that, this tool is available to simplify patient care and make sure everyone is truly working together.
Watching the Top Advertisements
One of the best ways to evaluate the best EMR software is to look to see which of their advertised claims best fits your needs. For example, if you have a maximum patient range of up to 50 people in a small town, it then you won't have the same requirements as an emergency clinic in the middle of suburbia. Obviously, there will also be different price ranges to consider. Depending on what your budget is at the time, you may decide to invest in the basic version at first and then move on to the more advanced features later. It's always good to get a professional's recommendation of course, and you can do the same thing with the top EMR software. There are experts in this matter who can guide you towards the right program specifically for your individual needs.
If you want information like this, then you just need to submit a request for them to contact you as soon as possible. Most of the time, the top EMR software will also be advertised in several places. These are going to be seen by medical professionals all over, and you might even be able to get some of their own reviews. Usually, when doctors find something that is especially beneficial, they are eager to share that with their coworkers or partners. This is the same sort of procedure and you can get their testimonials depending on which program they purchased and what they used it for. If this is your plan, you can also find top reviews on the web. Because these are free to access, you don't have to worry about obligating yourself to a particular contract just because you're using a particular website for data research.
Benefits of Top EMR Programs
Along with all the responsibilities that a doctor has, having the top EMR software will take some of that worry off your shoulders. This is a time when you need to focus on your patient care, including the exact office practices that are being used to achieve that. However, because the office is in your name, you have all the control over the situation. This is why you will particularly benefit from this kind of personalized direction that will come from top EMR software professionals. If you want to see how the top EMR software list changes over time, you can also request to be subscribed to the various top newsletters to talk about this subject. This is going to be directed by the several software distributors explaining how the top EMR software programs work and what they have done for their clients. Not only can they save you a significant amount of time, but it can make the most of your purchase dollars.
If you already have some EMR software in your office, but are getting ready to upgrade, then this will require some investigation also. Perhaps it would be better to learn the top EMR software from a different manufacturer than just upgrading your current system? As time goes on and these program writers become better at spotting top physician and clinic needs, the EMR software is going to be more of a helpful tool for its purchasers. If you have the ability to track everything about a patient in one place, that is going to significantly reduce the chances of errors or simple mistakes. Sometimes, just the mistake of one number can mess up a prescription or other diagnosis. Don't take chances like this and make sure that you have the top EMR software programs working for you instead.
Source: http://www.emrsoftware.net/top-emr-software.html
Hospitals of course will have their own needs that the top EMR software can take care of in order to ensure not only patient safety but also efficiency. Whether the environment has a few beds or several, it will still be held to the standards of health care overall both legally and following the Hippocratic Oath. If they don't, they can find themselves in serious trouble, up to and including the loss of their license to practice. In order to avoid that, this tool is available to simplify patient care and make sure everyone is truly working together.
Watching the Top Advertisements
One of the best ways to evaluate the best EMR software is to look to see which of their advertised claims best fits your needs. For example, if you have a maximum patient range of up to 50 people in a small town, it then you won't have the same requirements as an emergency clinic in the middle of suburbia. Obviously, there will also be different price ranges to consider. Depending on what your budget is at the time, you may decide to invest in the basic version at first and then move on to the more advanced features later. It's always good to get a professional's recommendation of course, and you can do the same thing with the top EMR software. There are experts in this matter who can guide you towards the right program specifically for your individual needs.
If you want information like this, then you just need to submit a request for them to contact you as soon as possible. Most of the time, the top EMR software will also be advertised in several places. These are going to be seen by medical professionals all over, and you might even be able to get some of their own reviews. Usually, when doctors find something that is especially beneficial, they are eager to share that with their coworkers or partners. This is the same sort of procedure and you can get their testimonials depending on which program they purchased and what they used it for. If this is your plan, you can also find top reviews on the web. Because these are free to access, you don't have to worry about obligating yourself to a particular contract just because you're using a particular website for data research.
Benefits of Top EMR Programs
Along with all the responsibilities that a doctor has, having the top EMR software will take some of that worry off your shoulders. This is a time when you need to focus on your patient care, including the exact office practices that are being used to achieve that. However, because the office is in your name, you have all the control over the situation. This is why you will particularly benefit from this kind of personalized direction that will come from top EMR software professionals. If you want to see how the top EMR software list changes over time, you can also request to be subscribed to the various top newsletters to talk about this subject. This is going to be directed by the several software distributors explaining how the top EMR software programs work and what they have done for their clients. Not only can they save you a significant amount of time, but it can make the most of your purchase dollars.
If you already have some EMR software in your office, but are getting ready to upgrade, then this will require some investigation also. Perhaps it would be better to learn the top EMR software from a different manufacturer than just upgrading your current system? As time goes on and these program writers become better at spotting top physician and clinic needs, the EMR software is going to be more of a helpful tool for its purchasers. If you have the ability to track everything about a patient in one place, that is going to significantly reduce the chances of errors or simple mistakes. Sometimes, just the mistake of one number can mess up a prescription or other diagnosis. Don't take chances like this and make sure that you have the top EMR software programs working for you instead.
Source: http://www.emrsoftware.net/top-emr-software.html
Tuesday 3 January 2012
10 Questions on your fingertips when thinking about Electronic Medical Record
Buying an EMR system? No matter how great it seems to be, get good answers to these questions before you buy.
1. How is the product licensed?
Purchasing software for a home computer is relatively straightforward: You buy one copy and agree to put it on only one computer. But when you buy software for a network in a physician practice, where a number of people have access to a single server, the licensing is a lot more complicated.
Some companies will grant a “site license” under which you pay for the use of the software at your site with no restriction on the number of users. More commonly, however, vendors license their software per user. If you’re licensing a system per user, be sure you know exactly what the vendor means by this; it can be more complicated than it sounds. For example, Practice Partner has a “park” feature that allows you, when you’re working with a patient record, to bring up a blank screen (for example, to prevent unauthorized people from accessing the patient record while you step out of the exam room) and then quickly log back into where you were in the system. Even though no one can use the software when it’s parked, the system still requires an active license to keep the record in park. Therefore, if you want to have computers in every exam room and be able to put them in park when you aren’t in the room, you would have to purchase a separate license for each computer.
2. What does each license actually provide?
Physician Micro Systems issues separate licenses for the various components of its system (such as scheduling, billing and patient records). The idea is that you buy licenses only for the people who will need to access each system component. At first glance, this seems like a great way to save money in that you appear to pay only for what each staff member will use (e.g., nonclinical staff wouldn’t seem to need licenses for the patient-records program). However, this isn’t necessarily true. For example, one of my favorite features of Practice Partner is its internal e-mail, which allows you to link a message to a patient’s chart. But we found that anyone who answers the phone and wants to link an e-mail message to a chart has to have a license for the patient-records program. So we had to buy a patient-records license for the receptionist, even though she never looks at patient charts, just so she could send the clinical staff messages that are linked to charts. Physician Micro Systems has since improved this situation by enabling one message system to be used across the scheduling and patient-records programs (but still not the billing component).
3. How soon are licenses released when a user exits?
A final aspect of licensing to consider is the amount of time it takes for a license to become available – in other words, how soon another user can log on – after a user logs out or after the system crashes.
Early on, we had particular difficulty trying to get back into the system after it crashed or after a user exited improperly. Initially in these situations, the system wouldn’t release the license until we ran a utility program, which couldn’t be run while anyone was using the system. So, for example, if my laptop lost power and caused my user license to lock up, I had to ask one of my staff members to exit the patient-records program to free up a license so that I could get back to seeing patients. Once we came to a point at which everyone could exit, we could run the utility and free up the frozen license. Physician Micro Systems has since improved the utility program so that it can be run while people are using the system, but doing so still takes time when you’re trying to see patients.
4. What technical support is available, and when?
No one looks forward to having to use it, but technical support is a necessary evil – and one that you have to pay for. Unlike much of the home-computer software that comes with free technical support, most vendors of business and medical systems charge an annual fee for the help they provide (in addition to what you pay the phone company for the call).
All vendors offer technical support, but you need to know what kind of support is available, when it is available and who will be providing it. For example, Physician Micro Systems is located in Washington state, and our practice is in South Carolina. Under our first support agreement with the company, we couldn’t reach anyone for support until 8 a.m. Pacific time, which is 11 a.m. our time. That’s an awfully long time to wait when you find a problem first thing in the morning. Physician Micro Systems did contract with another firm to provide support early in the morning, but one of my first experiences with the subcontractor was a disaster. The suggestion I received for solving our problem included deleting our entire medical billing database, which required several hours of my time to restore from backup files – and didn’t solve the problem. Eventually, we contracted with Physician Micro Systems for support 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
5. How much does technical support cost?
Although we were able to obtain 24/7 support from Physician Micro Systems, it didn’t come cheap; the annual cost is 15 percent of the value of the software. This kind of support is expensive, but the security of knowing that you can reach a reliable person at any hour is well worth the cost.
When you contract for technical support, you need to be very clear about what the support fee buys for you. Will you reach a human being who can walk you through your problems, or will you be directed to Internet-based help files? The only way to judge the quality of a vendor’s support is to talk with people at practices that actually use the vendor’s software; don’t rely on sales reps and the statistics they quote. When you check with other practices, don’t simply ask, “How is the technical support?” Instead, be specific:
- When is technical support available (and unavailable)?
- How long does it take to reach someone when you have a problem?
- How long does it take the technical support staff to offer a solution?
- Do the solutions offered actually solve your problems?
6. How is text imported into the system?
You also need to consider how you will get information into your EMRs. No matter how you enter your notes, you will still need a way to import other text (such as X-ray reports, notes from consultants and operative reports) into your records. Using a scanner and an optical character recognition program to convert the text on those pages to text in your EMRs saves an enormous amount of physical storage space, and it lets you access the information much more easily. But be sure you’re comfortable with how this will be done. Ask whether additional hardware and software is required for this task. In addition, ask what text formats the software can read.
7. Which image formats will the system support?
EMRs have a tremendous potential to store medical images. But be sure you know which image formats the systems you’re considering will support.
Images are saved as certain types of files, and these are indicated by the three-letter extension (such as BMP, PCX, GIF or JPG) on the names of the image files. For example, a JPG file of a chest X-ray might be named smithchest.jpg. The problem with storing images in EMRs is that they take up enormous amounts of memory compared with text. But some image formats are much more efficient than others (the same image might occupy 200k of memory in one format and 10k in another). Choosing a system that allows multiple image formats allows you to select the file type that best balances efficiency with visual quality for a given kind of image. Having a system that allows multiple file formats also gives you more choice about the sources from which you can accept images (for example, scanners and digital cameras support only certain file types).
Because of the limited number of image formats that Practice Partner supports, we had to purchase additional software to convert image files to a format our system can handle. For this task, we chose FaxVue Pro by Faxtastic – a product that has since been discontinued.
8. What printers will the system support?
Even a completely computerized practice still has to work with paper to communicate with a paper-based world (I have yet to receive a request for patient records on a disk). So be sure to consider the issue of printing. Unfortunately, not every printer will work with every EMR system.
Initially, we used four types of printers ranging from a very basic Bubble-Jet to virtually state-of-the-art laser printers – and we still couldn’t print a complete patient chart. After experimenting with numerous printers over a 2 1/2-year period, we finally found one that would enable us to print a complete patient chart. Make sure you know what printers are compatible with the system you want to purchase and what printer drivers you will need. And ask the vendor to demonstrate the system’s printing capabilities during installation in your practice.
9. What if you need to replace the system?
When you’re at the brink of buying a new EMR system, the last thing you want to consider is having to replace it. But given how quickly both the technology and your needs can change, the time to start thinking about the transition to your second EMR system is the day you start looking for your first one. It’s a lesson that a friend of mine learned the hard way. When his software license agreement was about to expire, he decided to switch to a new system. But the day after the license expired, he found that he couldn’t access any of his data.
Before you buy a system, be sure that you will be able to access your data if you decide to switch. In addition, ensure that the data can easily be transferred to another system. Otherwise you may find yourself having to print all your records and scan them into your new system.
10. Is everything in writing?
After two years of challenges as well as success, I still think EMR systems are the way to go for family physicians. What they cost you in hassle is more than offset by what they deliver in efficiency and quality of documentation. But dealing with software companies is no different than dealing with any other vendors: You need to know what questions to ask before you buy, and you need to get every promise in writing. Otherwise those “free upgrades” and “hassle-free interfaces” that you were promised can end up costing you tremendous amounts of time, money and anguish. The oldest advice applies to the newest technologies.
Source: http://www.aafp.org/fpm/2001/0300/p29.html
Monday 2 January 2012
Five thoughts for an EMR from EMR User
Discussions surrounding EMRs and their adoption (or lack thereof) have grown into heated debates concerning their usability and effectiveness. And the most vocal folks, whose opinions could very well change the way EMRs work, are none other than the end users themselves: the clinicians.
That’s why we looked to David Hager, MD, to debunk some of the myths and explain some of the gripes he and his colleagues have with EMR systems.
“I’m a life-time geek who played Star Trek on a teletype machine and learned to code in C from Kernighan and Ritchie’s first edition book,” Hager said. “I’ve built multiple websites from the ground up, handcoding much of the javascript or PHP content. I’m identified among my peers as the computer guy who carries the flag of discontent with awkwardly cobbled products over which we had no choice, and which slows us down by virtue of poor designs, and poor network infrastructure planning centrally.”
With that said, Hager gives us Five thoughts for an EMR from EMR User:
1. Just how bad is it? “The nature of our problems propelled a line of thinking that I hope might be useful outside of our own paralyzed system,” said Hager. To him, daily experiences with “clunky interfaces, awkward data entry, mind numbing popups, excessive mouse clicks, nonsensical forced choice radio buttons, slow response times, loculation of information, lack of integration or analysis, and identical looking notes,” is unbearable. “None of this would have inspired me to buy an EMDiscussions surrounding EMRs and their adoption (or lack thereof) have grown into heated debates concerning their usability and effectiveness. And the most vocal folks, whose opinions could very well change the way EMRs work, are none other than the end users themselves: the clinicians.
That’s why we looked to David Hager, MD, to debunk some of the myths and explain some of the gripes he and his colleagues have with EMR systems.
“I’m a life-time geek who played Star Trek on a teletype machine and learned to code in C from Kernighan and Ritchie’s first edition book,” Hager said. “I’ve built multiple websites from the ground up, handcoding much of the javascript or PHP content. I’m identified among my peers as the computer guy who carries the flag of discontent with awkwardly cobbled products over which we had no choice, and which slows us down by virtue of poor designs, and poor network infrastructure planning centrally.”
With that said, Hager gives us five points of view from an EMR end user:
1. Just how bad is it? “The nature of our problems propelled a line of thinking that I hope might be useful outside of our own paralyzed system,” said Hager. To him, daily experiences with “clunky interfaces, awkward data entry, mind numbing popups, excessive mouse clicks, nonsensical forced choice radio buttons, slow response times, loculation of information, lack of integration or analysis, and identical looking notes,” is unbearable. “None of this would have inspired me to buy an EMR with my own money,” Hager added. So instead, he developed workarounds with word processor macros, spreadsheets, and .PDF software to do what the EMR can’t and won’t.
2. Alternative systems are hard to implement. Hager said his colleagues harbor the same feelings of discontent toward the EMR they’re using. So naturally, Hager began to wonder: Why can’t they find a new EMR? “Cost,” he said. “Yes, there’s the prodigious cost of a new product, but then there’s the problem of migrating existing patient data to the new product. Vendor lock.” If a practice makes a significant capital investment on a go-forward basis in an EMR system, said Hager, but it realizes the decision was a mistake, there’s little they can do about it. “Now their patient records are locked in a bad product, unless the practice is in the enviable financial position of being able to change products,” he said. “It will either muddle unhappily along with the bad product, or dump the records back to paper. The cost of a new EMR plus the cost of data migration equals prohibitive cost.”
3. Physicians are open to new technologies. Believe it or not, Hager said physicians are indeed eager adopters of technology that helps them work faster, more effectively, or more profitably. “Since EMRs weren't meeting those standards, and we weren't buying them, especially at the going total cost of ownership, the government decided the problem was not with the EMR products, but with the doctors,” he said. “And so, [it] enacted a program to carrot/stick us into using them.” Hager pointed out similar programs weren’t necessary for the adoption of CT scanners, PET scans, robotic surgery devices, ambulatory EEGs, gene sequencing, and even smartphones. “So why create a program to force adoption of EMRs?” he questioned. “Because we didn’t like them. They weren’t market ready.”
4. Try giving physicians what they actually want. In reality, said Hager, if EMRs offered clinicians what they wanted and needed, they’d be flying off the shelves. “Steve Jobs understood that,” he said. “Provide a product that inspires and moves a customer beyond the mechanics of software and hardware.” Hager looked to a colleague to describe the EMR they’re using. “Our EMR, ‘lacks the level of sophistication and integration necessary to capture my imagination and fuel a desire in my mind to think of ways I can use it to help make my job easier and enrich the lives of my patients.’” In his own experience, Hager added his EMR has failed to work for him. “I work for it,” he said. “I’m a data entry tool that serves the product. It does little for me in return that a paper record can do better and more reliably. It’s recognized within our medical staff that our EMR is not a tool for clinicians – it’s a tool for administrators."
5. Flexibility is key. Despite his gripes concerning EMRs, Hager believes there is a solution that could work and even make EMRs something physicians “actually crave.” “If clinicians can change EMR products at will, with little or no data migration cost, they are likely to try multiple products until they find what they like,” he said. In a scenario such as this, he said, market competition would be fueled by freedom of customer choice, driving vendors to produce what clinicians want at more competitive prices. “How to get there?” Hager asked. “Standardize data constructs. HIE developers want that so HIE will work. Apply the same concept to the main body of patient data, and not only will HIE be seamless, but EMR products can become interchangeable.” Structure the data first, Hager added, and design the products second. “That progression helped to fuel the wild explosion we call the World Wide Web.”
Source: http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/5-points-view-EMR-end-userR with my own money,” Hager added. So instead, he developed workarounds with word processor macros, spreadsheets, and .PDF software to do what the EMR can’t and won’t.
2. Alternative systems are hard to implement. Hager said his colleagues harbor the same feelings of discontent toward the EMR they’re using. So naturally, Hager began to wonder: Why can’t they find a new EMR? “Cost,” he said. “Yes, there’s the prodigious cost of a new product, but then there’s the problem of migrating existing patient data to the new product. Vendor lock.” If a practice makes a significant capital investment on a go-forward basis in an EMR system, said Hager, but it realizes the decision was a mistake, there’s little they can do about it. “Now their patient records are locked in a bad product, unless the practice is in the enviable financial position of being able to change products,” he said. “It will either muddle unhappily along with the bad product, or dump the records back to paper. The cost of a new EMR plus the cost of data migration equals prohibitive cost.”
3. Physicians are open to new technologies. Believe it or not, Hager said physicians are indeed eager adopters of technology that helps them work faster, more effectively, or more profitably. “Since EMRs weren't meeting those standards, and we weren't buying them, especially at the going total cost of ownership, the government decided the problem was not with the EMR products, but with the doctors,” he said. “And so, [it] enacted a program to carrot/stick us into using them.” Hager pointed out similar programs weren’t necessary for the adoption of CT scanners, PET scans, robotic surgery devices, ambulatory EEGs, gene sequencing, and even smartphones. “So why create a program to force adoption of EMRs?” he questioned. “Because we didn’t like them. They weren’t market ready.”
4. Try giving physicians what they actually want. In reality, said Hager, if EMRs offered clinicians what they wanted and needed, they’d be flying off the shelves. “Steve Jobs understood that,” he said. “Provide a product that inspires and moves a customer beyond the mechanics of software and hardware.” Hager looked to a colleague to describe the EMR they’re using. “Our EMR, ‘lacks the level of sophistication and integration necessary to capture my imagination and fuel a desire in my mind to think of ways I can use it to help make my job easier and enrich the lives of my patients.’” In his own experience, Hager added his EMR has failed to work for him. “I work for it,” he said. “I’m a data entry tool that serves the product. It does little for me in return that a paper record can do better and more reliably. It’s recognized within our medical staff that our EMR is not a tool for clinicians – it’s a tool for administrators."
5. Flexibility is key. Despite his gripes concerning EMRs, Hager believes there is a solution that could work and even make EMRs something physicians “actually crave.” “If clinicians can change EMR products at will, with little or no data migration cost, they are likely to try multiple products until they find what they like,” he said. In a scenario such as this, he said, market competition would be fueled by freedom of customer choice, driving vendors to produce what clinicians want at more competitive prices. “How to get there?” Hager asked. “Standardize data constructs. HIE developers want that so HIE will work. Apply the same concept to the main body of patient data, and not only will HIE be seamless, but EMR products can become interchangeable.” Structure the data first, Hager added, and design the products second. “That progression helped to fuel the wild explosion we call the World Wide Web.”
Source: http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/5-points-view-EMR-end-user
That’s why we looked to David Hager, MD, to debunk some of the myths and explain some of the gripes he and his colleagues have with EMR systems.
“I’m a life-time geek who played Star Trek on a teletype machine and learned to code in C from Kernighan and Ritchie’s first edition book,” Hager said. “I’ve built multiple websites from the ground up, handcoding much of the javascript or PHP content. I’m identified among my peers as the computer guy who carries the flag of discontent with awkwardly cobbled products over which we had no choice, and which slows us down by virtue of poor designs, and poor network infrastructure planning centrally.”
With that said, Hager gives us Five thoughts for an EMR from EMR User:
1. Just how bad is it? “The nature of our problems propelled a line of thinking that I hope might be useful outside of our own paralyzed system,” said Hager. To him, daily experiences with “clunky interfaces, awkward data entry, mind numbing popups, excessive mouse clicks, nonsensical forced choice radio buttons, slow response times, loculation of information, lack of integration or analysis, and identical looking notes,” is unbearable. “None of this would have inspired me to buy an EMDiscussions surrounding EMRs and their adoption (or lack thereof) have grown into heated debates concerning their usability and effectiveness. And the most vocal folks, whose opinions could very well change the way EMRs work, are none other than the end users themselves: the clinicians.
That’s why we looked to David Hager, MD, to debunk some of the myths and explain some of the gripes he and his colleagues have with EMR systems.
“I’m a life-time geek who played Star Trek on a teletype machine and learned to code in C from Kernighan and Ritchie’s first edition book,” Hager said. “I’ve built multiple websites from the ground up, handcoding much of the javascript or PHP content. I’m identified among my peers as the computer guy who carries the flag of discontent with awkwardly cobbled products over which we had no choice, and which slows us down by virtue of poor designs, and poor network infrastructure planning centrally.”
With that said, Hager gives us five points of view from an EMR end user:
1. Just how bad is it? “The nature of our problems propelled a line of thinking that I hope might be useful outside of our own paralyzed system,” said Hager. To him, daily experiences with “clunky interfaces, awkward data entry, mind numbing popups, excessive mouse clicks, nonsensical forced choice radio buttons, slow response times, loculation of information, lack of integration or analysis, and identical looking notes,” is unbearable. “None of this would have inspired me to buy an EMR with my own money,” Hager added. So instead, he developed workarounds with word processor macros, spreadsheets, and .PDF software to do what the EMR can’t and won’t.
2. Alternative systems are hard to implement. Hager said his colleagues harbor the same feelings of discontent toward the EMR they’re using. So naturally, Hager began to wonder: Why can’t they find a new EMR? “Cost,” he said. “Yes, there’s the prodigious cost of a new product, but then there’s the problem of migrating existing patient data to the new product. Vendor lock.” If a practice makes a significant capital investment on a go-forward basis in an EMR system, said Hager, but it realizes the decision was a mistake, there’s little they can do about it. “Now their patient records are locked in a bad product, unless the practice is in the enviable financial position of being able to change products,” he said. “It will either muddle unhappily along with the bad product, or dump the records back to paper. The cost of a new EMR plus the cost of data migration equals prohibitive cost.”
3. Physicians are open to new technologies. Believe it or not, Hager said physicians are indeed eager adopters of technology that helps them work faster, more effectively, or more profitably. “Since EMRs weren't meeting those standards, and we weren't buying them, especially at the going total cost of ownership, the government decided the problem was not with the EMR products, but with the doctors,” he said. “And so, [it] enacted a program to carrot/stick us into using them.” Hager pointed out similar programs weren’t necessary for the adoption of CT scanners, PET scans, robotic surgery devices, ambulatory EEGs, gene sequencing, and even smartphones. “So why create a program to force adoption of EMRs?” he questioned. “Because we didn’t like them. They weren’t market ready.”
4. Try giving physicians what they actually want. In reality, said Hager, if EMRs offered clinicians what they wanted and needed, they’d be flying off the shelves. “Steve Jobs understood that,” he said. “Provide a product that inspires and moves a customer beyond the mechanics of software and hardware.” Hager looked to a colleague to describe the EMR they’re using. “Our EMR, ‘lacks the level of sophistication and integration necessary to capture my imagination and fuel a desire in my mind to think of ways I can use it to help make my job easier and enrich the lives of my patients.’” In his own experience, Hager added his EMR has failed to work for him. “I work for it,” he said. “I’m a data entry tool that serves the product. It does little for me in return that a paper record can do better and more reliably. It’s recognized within our medical staff that our EMR is not a tool for clinicians – it’s a tool for administrators."
5. Flexibility is key. Despite his gripes concerning EMRs, Hager believes there is a solution that could work and even make EMRs something physicians “actually crave.” “If clinicians can change EMR products at will, with little or no data migration cost, they are likely to try multiple products until they find what they like,” he said. In a scenario such as this, he said, market competition would be fueled by freedom of customer choice, driving vendors to produce what clinicians want at more competitive prices. “How to get there?” Hager asked. “Standardize data constructs. HIE developers want that so HIE will work. Apply the same concept to the main body of patient data, and not only will HIE be seamless, but EMR products can become interchangeable.” Structure the data first, Hager added, and design the products second. “That progression helped to fuel the wild explosion we call the World Wide Web.”
Source: http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/5-points-view-EMR-end-userR with my own money,” Hager added. So instead, he developed workarounds with word processor macros, spreadsheets, and .PDF software to do what the EMR can’t and won’t.
2. Alternative systems are hard to implement. Hager said his colleagues harbor the same feelings of discontent toward the EMR they’re using. So naturally, Hager began to wonder: Why can’t they find a new EMR? “Cost,” he said. “Yes, there’s the prodigious cost of a new product, but then there’s the problem of migrating existing patient data to the new product. Vendor lock.” If a practice makes a significant capital investment on a go-forward basis in an EMR system, said Hager, but it realizes the decision was a mistake, there’s little they can do about it. “Now their patient records are locked in a bad product, unless the practice is in the enviable financial position of being able to change products,” he said. “It will either muddle unhappily along with the bad product, or dump the records back to paper. The cost of a new EMR plus the cost of data migration equals prohibitive cost.”
3. Physicians are open to new technologies. Believe it or not, Hager said physicians are indeed eager adopters of technology that helps them work faster, more effectively, or more profitably. “Since EMRs weren't meeting those standards, and we weren't buying them, especially at the going total cost of ownership, the government decided the problem was not with the EMR products, but with the doctors,” he said. “And so, [it] enacted a program to carrot/stick us into using them.” Hager pointed out similar programs weren’t necessary for the adoption of CT scanners, PET scans, robotic surgery devices, ambulatory EEGs, gene sequencing, and even smartphones. “So why create a program to force adoption of EMRs?” he questioned. “Because we didn’t like them. They weren’t market ready.”
4. Try giving physicians what they actually want. In reality, said Hager, if EMRs offered clinicians what they wanted and needed, they’d be flying off the shelves. “Steve Jobs understood that,” he said. “Provide a product that inspires and moves a customer beyond the mechanics of software and hardware.” Hager looked to a colleague to describe the EMR they’re using. “Our EMR, ‘lacks the level of sophistication and integration necessary to capture my imagination and fuel a desire in my mind to think of ways I can use it to help make my job easier and enrich the lives of my patients.’” In his own experience, Hager added his EMR has failed to work for him. “I work for it,” he said. “I’m a data entry tool that serves the product. It does little for me in return that a paper record can do better and more reliably. It’s recognized within our medical staff that our EMR is not a tool for clinicians – it’s a tool for administrators."
5. Flexibility is key. Despite his gripes concerning EMRs, Hager believes there is a solution that could work and even make EMRs something physicians “actually crave.” “If clinicians can change EMR products at will, with little or no data migration cost, they are likely to try multiple products until they find what they like,” he said. In a scenario such as this, he said, market competition would be fueled by freedom of customer choice, driving vendors to produce what clinicians want at more competitive prices. “How to get there?” Hager asked. “Standardize data constructs. HIE developers want that so HIE will work. Apply the same concept to the main body of patient data, and not only will HIE be seamless, but EMR products can become interchangeable.” Structure the data first, Hager added, and design the products second. “That progression helped to fuel the wild explosion we call the World Wide Web.”
Source: http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/5-points-view-EMR-end-user
