Home Forums Discussions General Discussion Dr. Kibbe Article in FPM- a must read!!!

http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/publications/journals/fpm/preprint/ehrincentive.html

Dr. Kibbe is the guru of the AAFP HIT department and has been following the progress of EHR development for a long time. He is a thoughtful and careful individual so this article packs even more punch. I hope Jon will read it, too.

This article hits the nail on the head. I look at any government incentive as a windfall, nice but I won't hold my breath.

I have long ago made the investment (and continue to upgrade) in an EMR/EHR (AC.) If there is enhanced reimbursement, I feel that I have earned it because I have been electronically charting and following what should be considered the standard of care. If it doesn't work out, I will continue to function, albeit grumbling that I was wronged and that the big boys have locked up the market. I won't lose any sleep. Now if I had not purchased, that becomes a more relavent question.

No one knows what they are doing in these times of uncertainty. I "bought the boiler" to use Bernanky's analogy, because the old one went out, I couldn't wait a year (or im my case 8).

To complain that "it isn't energy efficient" now... It would be nice to be get a bonus, but...

I agree that it isn't likely the federal payments will ever happen. Even if they did, the cost to our practice would very likely outweigh the business benefit.

I'm satisfied that AC meets our business requirements and happy with our IT investment made to date, without the federal incentive program. This federal "carrot" is not worth the hassle and ongoing drawback of submitting patient data to the federal bureaucracy.

The reason to get an EMR has always been to improve what we do. That may be what we do clinically and/or how we run our offices. Being mandated to have a certain type of EMR makes as much sense as being mandated what sort of home to buy. I know better than any governmental agency what will work for me and my patients.

Perhaps worse, a mandate will force EMR companies to focus on ill-defined meaningful use criteria to the detriment of what they would be better of focusing on; their client's needs.

Hmm, version 5?

No, there are valuable things about the CCHIT stuff in V5. It is good that we have tools to track and monitor patients and labs. It is also good that these things are optional.

What is BAD is that it delayed more important things like a PM system or a miread of small things that forever will pop up in a complicated system.

But that is a matter of priorities. At the time Jon wisely went with adding CCHIT to the program to widen the base. He DID need to do that to be competative. Now hopefully he can get back to the other stuff.

I like version 5.
It does still have some bugs but over all I like the way it works, love the order tracking, love the e-prescribe, like the hover to look at the visits in sign-off.( Long list of other things that are better.)
Heck, most software providers are going to charge you ( often an arm and a leg) for upgrades. We were given this one without any additional charge for the upgrade and the charge for next year isn't higher either ( I don't think, my bill will come due next month ).
I wouldn't advise someone to go with an EMR because of any government promise for extra money down the road. I would encourage conversion because paperless life is better.

Agree that the reason for using EMR should be better life and paperless practice.....not some pie in the sky financial incentive that we will most likely never see.

AC is a great value! It is popular because it is easy to use. It is inexpensive. It has a great user's forum. Jon and his staff have done a great job of delivering a very good product. I will not be in line for any gov't handout because I made a good choice by adapting AC to my practice.