Home Forums Discussions General Discussion 2nd Quarter Where's the beef?

Where are the updates , 6.0 and PMR?

Just asking

I agree. I just bought Medisoft but still have not completed the link proces to AC.I am looking around in the forum to see if anyone has experience with this Meanwhile AC let me know last year that we might have Practice management module in Januari. Last I asked (in March) the answer was Maybe April. Otherwise I love AC!

Practice Management MIGHT be demoed at the ACUC in JUNE.

IT WILL NOT BE OUT THEN.

It has been delayed by all of the push for meaningful use and reimbursement stuff. It fell on the back burner.

I too, would like to see it come out. I am currently NOT happy with my current arrangement (MTBC) and am looking at other options.

I cannot wait for AC, as I would expect it will probably be at least the end of the year.

CAVEAT: while I make the above statement, I am NOT connected to AC. I have little inside info (I have been working on ACUC, but that does not give me great insight at this moment on their timeline.) I know this has been long in the process. But I also know priorities have shifted with the government whims.

So I may be criticized for "venting" on the board (sorry, Bert), but I can't let this go by.

The last communication from AC was a newsletter posted here in November, 2010, at which time Jon Bertman said,
"Our Practice Management module is on track for beta release in the first quarter of 2011....The release delay is due to new Federal requirements for EHRs, specifically the requirment that EHRs be ONC-ATCB (aka Meaningful Use) Certified."
Note that was not just for MU...that was Practice Management. The newsletter was put out at the time of announcing a doubling of the cost of the program and support.

There has been no communication from him or anyone officially associated with AC since then. Well, that is not entirely true: in January the company put out a press release saying the program was MU certified.

Now the first quarter has passed, and some delay is understandable. BUT there is NO word from the company itself about what is going on. It is left to ACUC-planners and users "in the know" to leak updates. Now the latest rumor is "probably at the end of the year" for Practice Management. A few weeks or months late is one thing...now a major upgrade that was initially announced for Jan 1, then pushed back to 3/31 may not be out till the end of the year?

Why has there been no communication from the company announcing the delay? Why has there been no explanation given? When can we actually expect a release of the MU version? When practice management? And when the fixes on issues that have been reported on current versions for years?

Yes, I will write directly to Dr. Bertman, but I think it is reasonable to post this here.

Well done Jon (Baltimore)

As I try to plan for the upcoming year, it is difficult to make decisions as health insurance reform is up in the air and the status of a main portion of my practice(EHR and PMR) are also twisting in the wind.

I agree with Jon, but the naysayers and excuses now will fly, duck before it hits us in the head LOL

Jack,
I do not think any of us here are naysayers. Bert, Wendell and many of us who have used AC for a long time have been asking for basic improvements for a long time and are equally discouraged about not seeing these (changes to the letter writer, import items improvements, problem vs. diagnosis). We have had to accept the explanations that Federal mandates have changed the plans for the "growth?" of AC. Personally, I do not care about the PM, HM or MU as I think it has done/will do nothing but bog down what has been a very useful and intuitive program. But I have also had experiences with other EMRs long before these mandates and the responsiveness from them to their users was much worse than what I have seen with AC. I agree that Jon or one of his representatives should come to the boards and beg for your patience and it has been suggested to him that some type of regular newsletter be disseminated. My only thoughts about why these are not being done is because, like you and your desk full of things needing to be done, one must prioritize. And the government, as usual, put its dirty fingers into the batter and is stirring things up.
Hang in there. I know one thing. Jon will continue to work hard to make AC a great product. He is very, very sensitive to comments from and concerns of his subscribers.

I am one of the "The money will never be there to pay for MU anyway people" but am willing to play the game for a while.
How about AC doing daily twitter or facebook updates on V6 progress, a little manna from heaven for us 'believers'.

I don't know who is yay (sp?) or nay. However, I find it very hard to plan my practice around a non-existent schedule for AC upgrades. My 'IT' MA is going out on maternity leave soon, and if I don't upgrade by then, I do not have time to train all staff on new software nuances and new workflow. Like Jon, I can understand delays, but not lack of communication. Unlike Leslie, I am struggling and dearly love to have some MU dollars so I need at least 6.0, with or without PM.

MU money from who guys???

I need practice management so I can better run my practice for "real" revenue not perceived MU! One if lifes best lessons don't expect anything for free! If it is free it is usually too good to be true!

I use EZClaims for billing. Because AC does not easily import into EZCLaim without errors, I have developed middleware for scrubbing claims. In the meantime, all the data I gathered through that system has made it possible to manage real mailing lists, missing fee tickets, new patient letters, and other financial reporting. I've actually integrated reports from EZClaim and the clearing house so I can close the loop about actual receivables, contractuals, and AR. Also integrated into my middleware system is disease tracking (A1C to goal, last TSH, etc). All this is just by way of explanation that I don't know what PM enhancements will do for me.

I think the ARRA objectives are good drivers for quality. When I was heading the medical group, we struggled for years just to do chronic disease management - three years just to get diabetes done correctly. Most of MU quality requirements are already done in my practice, very time consumingly by manual labor. If the MU-aware AC 6.0 makes the task easier AND I get paid for all the work, I definitely wanted it yesterday.

So.....
What exactly needs to be done to be certified and qualify the AC for the stimulus payments.

I thought that Medical Use is the only - main component needed.

practice management? I don't know -

If this is not needed, I would suggest for the AC development team to FIRST do what is needed to make AC qualify for the stimulus. I would not mind to wait for the practice management module to be developed after the Ac becomes qualified for the stimulus.

The stimulus funds, if they come, would be a major help to my practice.

My message to the development team is to Please get this done; and I will surely say thank you when it is done

Believe me, Jack. I am also struggling. I just long ago learned not to count on the government to be the one to help me keep my head above water. I have had to be creative to stay in business this long.

http://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/Downloads/EP-MU-TOC.pdf

These are the criteria. We need 15 core objectives and 5 of 10 menu objectives. I think we can already meet these criteria on the current version of AC 5.1.7. It just needs to have the appropriate certification which allegedly 6.0 has. So as soon as we implement V6, it appears to me we can attest that we deserve the money. We have to use it for 3 months. So.....
I went through the list and picked out 10/15 for the core objectives and 5/10 menu objectives that I am essentially doing now with no change in my practice, so I am going to sign up and hopefully get $18k from the US government. I will believe it when I see it.

I believe the money will be coming, but I also believe that the probability of it staying in the current status and expectations diminishes with time.

Bill you are correct that most of us can qualify on the MU criteria alone, if it weren't for the fact that AC5 was not MU certified, we could have attested by now (let see, I registered on Jan 2, add 90 working days, ok, I should have been able to attest soon).

Of course, we all must prioritize, but did anyone notice that Jon Bertman had time to write a blog dated March 30, but not a word to users about version 6.0?
I can't imagine running AC, and what it must entail, but communication is essential to update current users.

Okay ? busted?

Fair enough and reasonable complaint. I?ve been dragging my feet to send out a newsletter because I wanted to have the V6 link there and ready for release. Alas, as always, last minute bugs were identified during beta testing and have been fixed, and we are now testing those fixes back at some beta sites to ensure we don?t need another build immediately following this. I expect a wider beta release next week, and the official release a few weeks after that.

For those that have used Amazing Charts for years, you'll recall that we used to release versions earlier in the QA/testing cycle, but then folks had to reinstall Amazing Charts over and over again on all their computers as bugs were discovered and the program fixed and re-released. We've changed our approach over time and now do much more QA and testing before releasing a version.

This version is ONC-ATCB Certified for Meaningful Use and (as of today, also CCHIT 2011 Certified as a comprehensive EHR (pre-market status until in use for more than 45 days)). For those who are planning on going for the Meaningful Use stimuus money from CMS, you just need to use V6 for 90 days ? and meet the Meaningful Use requirements (that have been color-coded in V6) ? to apply for the money. Keep in mind, though, that you have until Q2 2012 to apply for the 2011 EHR money.

Bottom line: V6 is in beta testing still and, barring any significant bugs, should be released later this month.

In terms of Meaningful Use, the bottom line is that for any providers who collected more than 24K from Medicare/year, you can get up to 44K over the next 5 years. (Less than this if you collected less. And if you have a significant percentage of Medicaid patients, there is potentially even more money available. Click here for more info on who is eligible.

Jon

I eagerly volunteer for the broader beta. Pick me! Pick me!!

(I can start counting the 90 days from first day I have the beta working)


(it is not clear to us, and CMS has not clarified, what 2012 brings. The language may actually mean that you only have the 90 days qualification in 2011 (a.k.a. 'first payment year' in the wording of the final ruling). Some consultants are trying to scare us by saying that in 2012 you may need to have the entire year of use to qualify.)

Dr. Bertman,
Thanks for explaining some reasons for the delay of V6, and telling us that you expect a release by the end of this month. Your last communication in November said that V6 would include practice management. It is rumored here that it will not, and PM will be out at the end of the year. Could you address that, please?

Where is Jon B's blog? on AC Forums?

amazingcharts.com
support
online community
Dr Bertman's what's up with that blog

Thanks, Dr. Bertman.
Users just really want to be kept "in the loop".

There are multiple reasons to use an EMR.

I jumped to it 9 years ago because I wanted to have a better way to chart and saw this as a good affordable solution.

It seriously helped be go from what I will admit was lousy charting to very good charting without a lot of effort (to chart.) Of course, I had to install the computer systems and such but that was part of the fun as well.

That was long before much of the Quality Measures were developed for medicine, and they have been useful in codifying what is proven good from what is perceived in medical care.

That was long before the government jumped in and started CCHIT or Stimulus money.

Now the push is on money. That is a lofty goal.

I am a Pediatrician (one of the lowest paid physicians) who see's predominately Public Aid (one of the lowest payors) in Illinois (one the lower paying Medicaid states) and I make it work.

My computers are refurbs but they get the job done. I would like to upgrade my computers. I would like to give my staff a bonus for working hard. Stimulus "promises" that. I WILL qualify but we have a government that may not even be able to pay it's own bills on Saturday. I will believe it when the check clears the bank!

In the mean time, I try to provide the highest quality care that I can. AC helps me do that. Are there things that can be done to make AC better? OH YEAH. I am MUCH more confident they will happen (eventually) than I will see Meaningful Money for Meaningful Use.

BTW Version 5 does not have codified smoking, race and language preference. Obviously the staff at AC was seriously deficient in not including these YEARS ago since they are so critical to patient care (OK, smoking maybe but for Peds it becomes a joke to see the box for a 1 year old. Might be nice to have it converted to family smoking though)

Everyone expects something different out the program. The early adopters were much more computer savvy than many of the newer persons who bought the program because of the "rush" to get something for stimulus money.

Many early adopters could care less about stimulus or many of the government mandates because we saw how efficient and smooth the program was before these hoops were made to jump through and we also saw that relevent changes that would have been made on a timely manner were now put on the back burner because of the chase to get certified (either CCHIT or MU.)

This is not to knock those goals. As a former PHO and multispecialty Medical Director, I can appreciate the both the goals and direction of Health Maintanance sections. I am not crazy about the execution but it is OK. Orders is a different matter. I think it was better but it was changed to make it "codified" that could be tracked better. While this is good so that you do not miss labs and such the execution was suboptimal.

I have, over the years kept lists of things I thought were wrong from the program. Many, if not most, of the things were extracted from this board. I have shared these lists a number of times, but what I am most impressed with is HOW MANY things on the lists ARE CORRECTED. Some of them are version specific, some of them are long standing. But we DO move forward despite the pulls in various ways.

Anyway, I have been rambling long enough.

Nice post, Wendell. I think one other thing that us "older "users need to put across is that, through the years, we have found our own ways to accomplish the things that the government is now requiring...tracking meds, orders, labs, demographics, screenings, etc. And now for us to have to change the way we have been using our EMR is frustrating. I think the new users definitely have an advantage over us because they are learning the program in it's entirety and using the various modules the way they were intended. I am struggling now to convert much of my collected data into "granular" data. So, to have to go through all of this again in even newer versions is not appealing to me.

Bump