I apologize in advance for asking questions that I am sure have been asked and answered before, but I have going round and round with my decision making for an EHR and can't seem to make the final plunge. I am a solo neurologist, presently using Medware as a practice management system (finally working quite well after much work). I have a receptionist, biller and transcriptionist, no nurse. I have the field narrowed down to AC, eClinicalworks and e-md's. I very much enjoy the philosophy of Jon with regards to cost and business structure and don't look forward to paying many of thousands more for one of the other two systems, unless I am getting much more in return. I have used the trial version of AC as well as eMDs. As a neurologist much of my documentation is very descriptive, which I believe lends itself well to AC with Dragon VR, however I am concerned with what I understand is an increasing push for granular data. eMDs is very nice in the way granular data can be picked to form a paragraph that is actually pleasant to read in contrast to some other programs.
I am also concerned that some things are missing from AC that may be very useful in the other programs. I may be missing something, but order tracking (which seems a core reason to utilize a computer in managing medial data) seems to be much better developed and easier to utilize in the other two programs than AC. While it looks like I may be able to generate reports that identify patients who have not completed various studies with AC, the real time order tracking features of the other two are impressive.
So I guess my questions are:
1.) are other neurologists successfully using AC (other neurology practices in my area, are using ECW with success)
2.) are the bells and whistles of the other programs useful, or just fluff,
3.) is AC likely to improve those parts of the program that are relatively weaker,
4.) does anyone feel that paying more for the other programs results in a better payoff (increased efficiency, better quality) down the road,
5.) does the onsite training of the other programs result in a better result albeit at much increased cost. While the upfront cost of AC software is much less, the real savings seems to be in the lack of need for onsite training. When going out a year or two, the annual maintenance costs of the various programs don'y seem to be as different. Also, the other programs come with PM software included so the annual cost of Medware would be eliminated
6.) how much weight would anyone give the fact that certain programs have received favored status from the local RHIO and IPA. (not AC).
I welcome any advice.
