So to summarize, and at the risk of stating the obvious:
1. Most new users are a bit shy to speak up on this board. I think we all should keep in mind that the new- or trial-user viewpoint is not fully represented here (at least not by those users themselves). On the other hand, as major new features are released, we all become new users in a sense; we are all in it together.
2. There is a significant faction of users who love AC, but don’t like the way it is getting more complex. Leslie eloquently described this viewpoint (“I like simple.”). I am not sure, but I think Wendell advocates a return to V1.25.
The fear is that AC will become no different from all of the bloated EMR programs out there. Also, the advancements in AC don’t always match the priorities of the users.
Others find the additional features of V5 to be valuable and find the program to be significantly improved. The Practice Management component projected for V6 is therefore either viewed with skepticism or anxiously awaited, depending on your viewpoint.
3. It does seem that there is a clear consensus that improving new user educational support should be a priority. (David: “I really believe there is a significant underestimation of how complex this program has become among those who have used it for some time as well as the developers”). There may be disagreement about what form the support should take, but it is generally felt to be needed. Even long-time users feel that way, both to make the path easier for those new to the program, and to introduce newer features to the vets. For example, users (new and old) are using the board to figure out how to use the most basic aspects of HM in AC. Also as Indy says: “the next wave of adopters are coming from a very different perspective….They are just wanting it "TO WORK", and don't want to be bothered with the details of how or why.” This will especially be true in the next couple of years as so many skeptical, reluctant physicians are “encouraged” to buy an EMR. The best EMR might be one that will have an “on-off” switch for many of its features, so you can decide for yourself whether to use e-prescribe, HM, practice management, etc.
4. Looking at this, I put potential resource improvements in two groups: those we can do something about, and those we cannot. We can continue to communicate to Jon what we would like his company to do: avoid over-complexity when adding new features; don’t neglect the basics (e.g. the letter writer, spellchecking); and perhaps improve the graphical user interface. Only he and his team can make those changes. We can (and should) ask, but we certainly can’t do it ourselves. At the ACUC, Jon talked about creating an "advisory board" of experienced users to help identify and prioritize proposed changes; sounds like a great idea to me.
There is one educational component that is almost universally mentioned as worthwhile, and that is a printed (online) user manual. Some may rarely or never use it, but almost everyone seems to think it is a good idea. Unfortunately, I put this in the category of “things we can’t do anything about” (until Bert's new blockbuster "AC for Dummies" is published). A manual might be done as a collaboration that involves users, but until Jon is committed, it won’t happen. So despite the potential value of such a project, I put it aside until AC (the company) decides to make it happen. The same goes for a more informative website.
For the moment, I will also put aside the topic of changes in the next ACUC. I started this thread in part because I perceived a bit of a divide between new and experienced users in Providence. It sounds like many others felt the same way, and planning for the next meeting will take that into account. This is basically a topic for another day.
So what can we do something about? Some people have expressed interest in educational videos (the short, practical type: not the ones you fast-forward through). We are working on a few, and would be happy to hear topic suggestions. These will likely take two forms: “beginner” tasks and those addressing newer features. Indy tantalizingly talks about “rich media” (“More on that once I have a test case”).
Left on the list of “what we can do something about” are the forum and the wiki. My experience with the forum is similar to David’s: “I have now been involved in a fair number of threads on this board, and there is a lot of information in them that I am implementing. However, the search function only goes so far....” I would suggest that we seriously look for ways to improve the forum and/or the wiki for this purpose. At the outset I suggested a forum on the board for new users. Valuable “how to” threads could be condensed and moved to that forum. Others have suggested some sort of “sticky” or other way to tag the key, generally valuable posts. Integrating the board and the Wiki was another proposal. Is there some sort of organizational scheme that will allow these threads to be grouped topically or linked together; to reduce redundancy, and become more user friendly? Is there a way to create integration between the board and the Wiki? The forum is a major asset to Jon and his company, and to users; all seem to agree on that. Is there a way to make it even better as the program evolves? Your thoughts...???
"Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit…
I will be brief."
~William Shakespeare, HamletOops. Well, I never said I was Shakespeare.
