Home Forums Discussions Problems v6.0.10 slower than 6.0.9

There are a number of issues alive on this board that list valid, recurring, serious issues, like the prescription writer issues and slowing of imports. Since this board is more or less officially sanctioned by AC to serve as an adjunct ( or in some cases substitute for) training and tech support, I think it would be appropriate to have AC post an acknowledgement of these issues and some indication of plans for their resolution.

I am in total agreement with David's post.

The eRx issue in particular clearly affects useability of one of AC's most important functions. There are several posts daily about this problem.
-- The slow display of the prescription writer affects my staff's workflow multiple times a day. Even with hardware acceleration off, sometimes it is necessary to kill the application in the Task Manager to restore responsiveness.
-- Refill renewal window also fails to open, refresh or freezes one or more times daily. At the same moment, I can switch to Allscripts free "eRx NOW" program and send an eRx promptly. So it apparently is a problem with AC, not SureScripts.

While this sounds good, it currently does NOT function that way.

I understand it is supposed to happen sometime in the future. But a time frame for that is unknown.

I was about to PM a couple of people. Did everyone get the email newsletter about the Practice Management and other AC endeavors. Nothing about issues with v6. That would have been the perfect place to address them.

How about a smidge of good news? I contacted NJ-HITECH, our state offered guidance to MU, and they were very happy to hear that I use AC. They called AC AMAZING and expressed a wish that all of the EMR's had handled MU as well.

That was my smidge of joy. I continue with the slowness of just changing from Inbox to Providers to opening a chart. My ERX does not have the slowness that others complain of, but the rest of my program became very sluggish since the summer. Honestly, I think the problem began with all the Windows Updates in July. Anyone else?

I, too agree wholeheartedly with David's post.

It is sad that AC went to such great lengths to handle the whole MU issue, and apparently did so pretty successfully. AC should be able to use this board to trumpet that success. Instead, the board is loaded with posts reporting complaints, and pleas for AC to publicly deal with them. It doesn't have to be this way. I don't understand why these issues are being dealt with so poorly.

Hi all,

I am one of the people who had significant speed issues upgrading to 6.0.9. This was helped by some new computers, new video cards in existing desktops, and turning hardware acceleration off in existing laptops. The combination of the above made things tolerable

This past weekend, due to some Meaningless Use issues, we upgraded to 6.0.10. This solved the MU problems.

However, things seem slower. The screen painting, line by line, when prescribing has become more prominent. Over all the system seems slower. Not nearly as bad as initially for the .9 upgrade, but worse than it had been.

Anyone else notice this?

Thanks. Gene

This is why I am afraid to go from 6.09 to 6.010. Steven all but promised that it would not happen to us!

Like Gene, I am anxious to hear from others: what got worse and what got better as you went from 09 to 010?

I have not seen this from 9 to 10.

There is no way on God's green earth I am going to 6.0.10. Nine is awful, ten must be worse.

I upgraded to version 10 in order to do the meaningful use. I really had no problems with version 9. Initially I did not notice any problems with 10 but today for the first time I have some significant slowing in the prescription writing area. I think the problem was the internet but I'm not sure. It was a patient who had 10 diagnoses and alot of meds. I think that the problem is the drug interaction section. I'm not sure. I have never turned that part of the emr off but I was tempted today. I was actually unable to eprescribe on patients that I had eprescribed for in the past. They were all codified and had gone through previously when they were eprescribed.

The good news is that I am ready to submit all the meaningful use stuff and could potentially look to turn things off at least until the end of the year???Maybe?

I have been using 10 since it came out and it did fix some issues. It is definitely NOT WORSE than 6.09. I would recommend the upgrade!. You get the updated crystal reports, blah, blah, blah. If I could understand programming, I could explain it better. Short story, I do not have the ERX lag that other people are complaining of. Try it!

Has NJ-HITECH used AC day in and day out. The government went out of its way to ruin EMRs and AC gladly accepted. I want my EMR back. I want to use Star Printer. I want to have no delays with prescription writer.

Wendell can you explain more of what you said? I didn't understand it. Thanks.

I tried 10. It is definitely AS BAD as 09. I would never upgrade to such a small upgrade given how difficult it is to install. God knows I don't want a database tuner crash.

I am not going to try it. The prescription writer is horrible.

I brought this up before in its own post and got one reply. But, I feel it is hugely important:

Is it the prescription writer (window) in general or eRx? I have never had an issue with eRx only the prescription writer which contains eRx. May sound picky, but they are totally different.

@St. Lawrence, I doubt it was the Internet unless you are using Dial-up.

Hi Bert,

The problem is definitely with the rx writer window, NOT the erx. Opening the "Write scripts" tab will initiate the slowness. Once you finally get to the erx step, things go smoothly.

I think people are using "ERX" generically.

Why did I upgrade to .10? We would not have been able to get MU on .9, that version miscounted Core 4 (erx) denominators.

Gene

That is what I thought. I don't know why it bothers me. Partly because it is misleading. ePrescribe started a little over a year ago. The prescriptioner writer started in 2001. I am not sure why everyone uses eRx to mean the prescription writer. It would be like referring to the progress note as the entire program.

I could see someone clicking on send for the eRx, and the program taking a while to send. That is why to try figure this out (since Amazing Charts doesn't seem to want to), it is best if we are all on the same page.

I am with Bert. I am still on 5.029 and am afraid to upgrade yet, in order to get my MU "reward" I need the features of V6. I am really ticked off. Unfortunately, changing EMRs would be like trying to change your health insurance....expensive, cumbersome, time-consuming and a huge PITA. However, I may have to scope out some other products.

I am not very computer savey but my problem was not so much writing scripts. Actually the scripts are pretty much all in there and codified. When I click on the drug( that is already codified) it takes quite some time for that drug to appear on the prescription pad. Meanwhile the interaction thingy is working fast and furious. Trying to warn me of interactions that we have known of for many many years. I get this revolving blue circle of hell. After several minutes I am able to click prepare. Then I go to the next drug in need of prescribing and begin this blue circle of preparation. I believe that the problem comes with a significant list of drugs. Older patients with many prescriptions are the most notable. I do think it is the internet connection and the interation checking.

So I prepare my list of drugs and hit the prescribe button for the next screen. On the next screen I hit "transmit to pharmacy" and the box says transmitting....with the blue circle of hell. I can watch this for 20 minutes or just get up and go see another patient. My resident geek goes in and shuts everything down restarts and prints the scripts instead of eprescribing.

Then I get scolded for getting an hour behind and ruining our potential lunch break. This just started happening to me this week. We upgraded to 10 a couple of weeks ago. Will see if the problem persists or was just a hiccup. It seems to be a problem more when I am wireless but yesterday it happened on a hardwired work station.

Usually when I hit the transmit electronically button....it is all done rather quickly...faster than printing. Maybe it is all about Watson trying to make a decision about whether or not THEY will allow the patient to have the prescriptions this evil physician is trying to prescribe. Or maybe it is that 70,000 people working at UHC taking care of 7million americans trying to decide if my care is appropriate or not. Who knows??

I am noticing another odd thing. I use uptodate free patient handouts for patient education. I have been handing out a bunch of them to meet MU. Whenever I print a patient handout, I get a message about the prescription writer. It asks me if it should continue and I have said yes and no and clicked the red x. Nothing consistently gets rid of it. Usually I can be quick enough to get the print to work and then just close it all. I don't know why printing patient education materials from uptodate would have anything to do with the prescription writer.

I suppose that I am bad in that I try to just get through the day and the patients as efficiently as possible so often I don't even read these messages.

Anyway....my advise would be to just use the MU wizard inside the patients chart and run your 90 day reports there when you have a minute or two. Then when it is all green except the attestations and you run the report and have no numerators or denominators, upgrade to 10 and you will have your reports and be ready to cross the finish line.

I have heard it is anywhere from 2-6 weeks before the MU $$$ comes through.

After reading these complaints about the Rx writer, I asked Alice about her experience. She says that sometimes it is the interaction checker that slows things down, but it does not seem to be always the culprit.

But her real complaint is that the Rx writer randomly decides not to put her dea/license number on the Rx, even though the box is checked. So currently she just does not want to go through it TWICE for the same Rx.

I do not have the prescription writer slowness that you complain of and I am using 6.0.10. I have Win 7 Pro.

My entire program slowness started this summer, after a year of using 5.0.29. I looked forward to the 6.0.9 upgrade, only to find it did not fix my slowness. I only used 6.0.9 < 1mo before asking tech support for help. I think the prescription writer improved with 6.0.10.

BTW, I have heard for years that Allscripts is not a great program for eprescribing.

@Wayne,

The reason why it is random is even though it is not checked when you start, it becomes checked when you click to load the prescription. Nine out of ten times I have to refill the radio buttons, another issue with 6.0.9. My work around is to put my DEA nunmber in my first address line. Looks stupid. Works great.

@St. Lawrence:

You have one of three choices:

1. Get rid of the interactions, thereby speeding up the process and lose MU.
2. The above and attest to it any way.
3. Not do MU like me -- because, as you can see, it hurts patient care.

I have patients with over 30 medications and it flies. It is simply the opening of the program which takes about five seconds.

This is all so painful for me to read here on 5.17. I would really like to collect $18k for MU but... I spoke c Guardian angels and asked them what the deal was and did they have any plan to fix it. The answer I got was that it was a trade off. If I want MU I need to deal with speed issues. They implied that there would be no fix forthcoming any sooner than V7 which they HOPE will be ready by 1st quarter 2012 ie probably not for a year. This is not what I anticipated with the much celebrated price hike.

Post

Here is the problem:

My garage door company gave me bad service, and I switched to another one. Took me one phone call.

Webber Oil increased the price on their oil and didn't deliver on time, and I switched to Suburban Propane, and it took a phone call and a charge for switching tanks.

My car dealership in Portland gave me bad service, and I switched to one in New Hampshire.

If your EMR company goes south, you must:

1. Research a new company out of the 200 or 300+ out there.
2. Hope the import of your data is doable.
3. Install an entirely different system on your server.
4. Pay a huge increase in cost.
5. Pay a huge amount of money in training fees.
6. Learn a whole new work flow for yourself.
7. Teach your staff that entirely different work flow.

All this while you are working full time. This would be a tremendous undertaking.

My point exactly...very similar to trying to switch your health insurance. They have us by the #%$@. Jon may be getting high ratings with new users but wait until they experience all this frustration. I think AC's satisfaction ratings will be taking a nose dive.

Leslie, it may still be that "In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." I'm still on 5.029, with no plans to change based on what you all have told me. Even that, objectively, is not a very good program as software goes. Look at what Quicken can do, how simple and stable it is, and then step back and compare with AC which has a comparatively really simple task of storing some text in a database. Yes, I am sure it was challenging to do. But it is like the evolution of the eye; No one could design a camera using only water and jelly. The eye is an evolutionary miracle. But it is a lousy camera. That sums up my feelings towards AC.

Very well said, David

I find it sad that the people who have had nothing but great things to say about AC for years are now giving it a big thumbs down. Bert calling the support staff "guardian devils" is telling indeed. I hope Jon is paying attention.

His last response was "tough %$#!, you get what you pay for".

If I was Jon, I would not only be paying attention but responding, apologizing and explaining his plans for improving his product. This board is where lies the core of his business survival. We represent the most loyal and involved of his customers. He better speak up or this ship will sink!!

It is sad to watch what is going on daily. BMW gave me a new turbo engine but not the brakes don't work. It's a tradeoff. But, they did say I could go back.

Exactly Bill.

How many of you got the email/newsletter?

How many of us will take our MU dollars and buy another EMR?

Fascinating post. Amazing amount of action on this in the last 24 hours.

In one office I have 5.0.29 - internet went down, took almost 1 minute for the prescription writer to load. That was worse than the early beta versions of 6. When internet returned, it was back to the races.

In the other office I use 6.0.8. Never saw the need to go to 0.9 or 10. I might when it comes to MU. Illinois (medicaid) stated they probably won't be paying out until Feb 2012 although you can register. Speed is OK with 6.0.8.

A lot of people have no speed problems, others like Bert have a tremendous amount of problems. I had them at first (6.0.4, I think) but not in the later itinerations. I did upgrade hardware however (less than $500 for 4 computers) to used dual cores. Interestingly, my P4 machines work at OK speeds with the tweaks spelled out in the board. Could have held out that $500.

The bottom line is: Does the speed hit exceed the potential reimbursement for MU? If you are not going to MU there is no reason to go to V6 (well, maybe some improvements, but mostly, no)

If you are going for MU then the other issue is will the problems be corrected with better hardware, and should you pony up first? This did not work for Bert, but did work for me (probably his video cards cost more than all my upgrades ;))Truly I can't address those questions. I am thinking abot moving to 6.0.10 this weekend and will be prepared to reverse it all IFF there is a significant speed hit.

I had to adjust the hardware acceleration on our XP machines as the prescription writer was almost unusable ( but not on the Windows 7 machine). I'm running 6.09 and plan to stick to it as we aren't doing MU at the present time.

I was doing meaningful use with the older versions and had to upgrade to get the reports so I've only used 10 for a couple of weeks. It just seems quite different. I have never had the drug interactions turned off. Are they different in version 10 than version 9?

What Email, Newsletter???? We didn't get a freakin' thing here at our office and I very regularly check my spam folder too, before flushing it out, so it did not get thrown out.... Could one of you who have my email please foward me a copy so Nancy and I can stay at least half up to speed??? Thanks. Thank goodness I check the board now and again... Sheesh. What a way to run a railroad...

Paul