Home Forums Discussions Feedback and Recommendations Eprescribing has too many steps

It takes a minimum of 8 clicks to get a prescription sent electronically with the current eprescribing service:

1. Choose the medicine, wait for the screen to change
2. Choose the dosage, wait for the screen to change
3. Choose the frequency
4. Choose Save, wait for the screen to change
5. Choose Take Completed Rx to Review Screen, wait for screen to change
6. Choose to Proceed to Transmit/Print, wait for screen to change
7. Choose Transmit RX, wait for screen to change
8. Choose Pharmacy, wait for screen to change

Some recommendations which would eliminate at least 3 steps:
1. Do not for the use of the select frequency step, make optional.
2. Allow the option of going right to the the transmit screen-eliminating one step
3. Have the last pharmacy used be the default. Most of the time, scripts go to the same place every time

So this is what Bert was talking about? Well it turns out, from your explanation that it is NOT THE e-prescription vendor that is the issue, it is the AC implementation....

No, it's SureScripts that has multiple steps. AC is only an entry point.

I jumped in and paid for the e-prescribing but also find to many steps. I had written Rx's through RelayHealth portal where they had SureScrips--- It was not clunky like this set up. To be real we need to be able to write things out clearly-- in our words what the prescription should be. not do the 15 different steps. I believe the RelayHealth version was a little better. ??? same company, not sure.

Right now I am not doing the escripts as it is to much for my staff.

I think when there is to much fussing the joy leaves quickly in doing this stuff. Waiting for a step and then another click and a wait. I'll spend the time on Medicare RX's if I have to but not others.

It takes away from the patient encounter to be clunky in front of them as they watch.

Bonnie Sprague, ARNP

George, you can't blame everything on AC. What does AC have to do with the ridiculous drill down method that the ePrescribers use. The problem is in order to have uniformity, you have to have a way that you can click through the system. That, unfortunately, means step after step after step.

I can just imagine going through these gyrations only for the patient to tell me, "Oh, I am allergic to penicillin."

My comments were meant to be constructive

I agree with Vicky that the eprescribe through AC is too clunky and difficult. I would rather use the free ERXNow than that system. It is also clunky but not as confusing. Has anyone tried to have AC interface with ERXNow? You pay 300.00 for the interface and a monthly fee of 20.00--does anyone have any experince with this?

Hi Francisco,

Do you go by Javier?

I think the AC/New Crop has a lot of steps, but from my perspective it is miles ahead of the ERXNow. Some of my biggest concerns with with Erx Now were:

1. Medication list-was maintained from a pharmacist's perspective, not a doctor's perspective. When refills are up, the med falls off the list. It was very annoying to have to keep searching the inactive meds to keep the list up to date.

2. Refills could not be done from the med list. Had to go to a
the "prescribing screen: to do refills-I love the INSTANT REFILLS-saves so much time.

3. The system went down a lot.

4. I had to keep two med lists to have the meds in AC. When I gave up on that, my staff and I about went nuts trying to print a med list on every pt for every visit. Then we ran into the issue of the meds falling off the list.

5. Very slow and clumsy

6. Now associated with MISYS which from my handson experience was a terrible EMR wih terrible service. There was one support person, Ruth Hummel who was very helpful, most of the rest of the staff seemed to care less if there was a problem.

While there are a number of steps to getting a script to the pharmacy, it is much more efficient. I only have to keep my med list in AC because the list synchs back to AC. It isn't perfect, but I really like it. It has helped my efficiency.

And it doesn't automatically get into the current med list in the AC pt chart so double data entry if you want to keep the chart clean and up to date. I guess the problem is that computer code is so bloated it has become too burdomsome to write good program functionality

I understand that improving e-prescribing is high on the AC list, but I suspect that will be after V5, not with V5

Can you spell F A X? Notwithstanding the money from Medicare.

There are always benefits to drill down models. In your more expensive EMRs such as Logician, a drill down format will give you a more accurate and precise note and since the computer can keep track of the clicks, it will help you with E & M coding and other benefits. For eScripts to work and be able to sending scripts electronically, every script will need to be in the same format, not written freehand.

The risks or negatives: They will ALWAYS be MUCH, MUCH slower. And, in that situation time isn't only money, time is time.