Home Forums Discussions General Discussion So-I didn't get the email

When should we expect Version 4 now?

As I understand it, there will now be a version 3.7 to address some vital issues. There may be some other releases between now and the Conference.

Which feature are you dying to see?

My understanding (and I am not being curt), but we can expect it when it is ready.

I can't wait for new version. I signed up to be beta tester.

Beta...that's where you get the newest version and there are no issues at all? (Inside joke)

Suurrre, right......
Those you don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it....

It's very depressing news indeed. We have been hearing about some of these "practice management" updates for years promised for years now. It sounds like it will be well after June before we see another update and that is a real let down. I think we should all get free air fare to the conference or a new car or something?

WARNING: RUMORS AHEAD.

It is my understanding that the upgrade to Version 3.7 will be coming out this month, and it is possible that another minor upgrade might appear before June.

Version 4.0, on the other hand, is supposed to be a major upgrade that will incorporate many of these long-discussed features. I would not be surprised if there was a sneak preview for Conference attendees in June.

Another thing: I think everyone is under the impression that 4.0 is going to automatically include Practice Management. It probably won't. A practice management module is something akin to Medisoft or Lytec. This is a huge undertaking maybe in the same league as how long AC took to code.

Even Microsoft will promise a major OS to come out in time for Christmas only to ship it in February. I wouldn't sit there and count on the PM. My guess is too that the PM will need to go through alpha testing and beta testing, etc. There are apt to be many bugs. It's a big undertaking.

There are many billers/coders on here, but there are probably far more providers. I could love the PM, but my biller would probably quit if I forced her to change from eMedware unless it was dramatic.

I think that Jon feels a lot of pressure even on 4.0, and it will be ready when it is ready. And, PM may come along after that. I think the biggest mistake Jon made was mentioning PM or promising it too soon. We have a great product as it is.

I certainly understand where you are coming from though.

I thought I remembered a communique from Jon stating that, while there might be a few PM features in 4.0, it would mainly modify the program (architechture changes?) so that they could begin to build and integrate a PM module.

Excellent points, Bert.

I do believe that the lack of a good practice management solution is probably one of Jon's biggest sales obstacles right now. However, it seems to me that the process of developing an integrated PM system from scratch is fraught with peril.

For one thing, many present users do not use the billing capability of Amazing Charts at all, and they don't want to, ever. They don't want to pay for an extra feature that they are never going to use. What these users would really like is an option to make the billing and coding dialog boxes go away forever.

These people include:

• Cash only clinics.
• Commercial on-site clinics.
• Practices with an outside biller.
• People who have long-term contracts with other billing software companies (NextGen, etc).

Many other present users have a practice management program that they are already using which they are very happy with. It would be a big deal to change to "Amazing Charts PM", and they won’t do it until they find out that "Amazing Charts PM" is a lot better or cheaper than the one they are currently using. These people just want a decent interface with their current program.

These are people using programs like:

• eMedWare
• MediSoft
• Lytech
• Office Ally/Practice Mate

Furthermore, if AC's practice management module is not markedly superior, people are going to continue to use their present method, and badmouth Jon's program. And yet, Jon will still have diverted precious time and money into developing these capabilities.

I wish Jon would just pick one or more of the existing Practice Management solutions listed above, create a truly seamless interface with Amazing Charts, and an excellent conversion tool to port people's accounts over from the other popular programs.

This is the fastest means for providing Amazing Charts users with an excellent practice management solution.

• This would reduce the time to market dramatically.
• Jon could leave Practice Management to a company that is geared to solving those problems, and concentrate on perfecting the EMR, which his company is obviously best suited for.
• People could use programs they are already happy with, and used to.
• This would result in an immediate increase in sales.
• Users who don’t want a PM system would not have to pay for it.

It's all about the niche in the market. I have found that most if not all companies with billing software design an excellent billing program and then as an afterthought, make a scheduler. For instance, it took me one day with eMedware to realize that scheduling lunch or putting in that someone would not be in counted as an appointmented. No shows count as appointments. How difficult would it have been to put in a little check box that removes that appointment from the total for the day.

I would rather spend more time on the scheduler than a PM. But, then that's just I. Many others would prefer a PM. But, either way, I would think Jon would need to do a lot of testing in order to put it out there as a full version.

And, I don't know how many times I have said this, but if the ICD-9 and CPT codes are already lacking in accuracy and functionality; and they are the cornerstone of practice management, it would be difficult to produce a good PM.

Right, and then you've got Office Ally, which started as a Practice Management program and then stuck an EMR on the side. How wonderful of an EMR is that likely to be?

I agree a seamless interface with a conversion tool should be the first priority. I would then offer some improvement on ICD-9 coding and CPT coding to improve on the basic PM offering that already exists in AC at this time.

I have Lytec 2004 and will require too many dollars to upgrade. I have read that AC works very well with EZ-Claim which has its own link with Quickbooks Pro. This works out to about 1000 USD as opposed to 3500 USD to update Lytec.
EZ-claim has it's own clearing house at 100 USD/month. I spend more than that on stamps. Currenty I use Office Ally which is even less expensive.
I basically do my own coding and think EZ-claims/Quickbooks should work perfectly fine for practice management. This may not work for anyone other than solo low volume practice.
My question to those wiser and more experienced is does this make sense?

I too am anxious for AC to provide a PM module. I called to find out what adding one more computer station (not user license) to my current PM program would cost ....$895/year in addition to what I am already paying for running it on four computers. Ridiculous! I told them where they could stick that license.

How can they possibly justify charging $895? It costs them practically nothing to add that extra station.

What PM program do you use currently, Leslie?

To play Devil's Advocate for a moment, and I apologize in advance since I don't know the whole situation. Leslie, if you don't mind what is your current cost per year for four stations. To me, there is not much difference in a per computer license vs a per user license. I actually prefer a per computer licesne as it avoids the possibility of the program mistaking users using multiple computers on a domain.

The only thing that is weird is that it is an annual charge. Every PM I have used, I pay for the licenses and that is that much like paying for Windows. Are you sure these aren't dynamic licenses which would mean you wouldn't really need an extra license.

@Brian...While the $895 sounds rather exorbitant I agree, one can't really look at it as though it doesn't cost the company anymore to let her put it on another computer. One could say the same thing about all software: Adobe, XP Pro, etc. You have the disk, why not put it on all of your computers? It doesn't cost them anymore. But, it really does.

This is just to get more information and stimulate conversation -- not to necessarily disagree.

As one of the folks who really wanted a PM module I must say although you are very correct in stating how hard it will be to get a fairly good one in place, the idea of having the AC of PM's I think is very attractive to many of us. If done correctly, so as to be easy to see, learn and use, much like AC the EMR is, what a wonderful thing that would be.

Many of us came to Jon and AC because of his; unique marketing style (Remember: Is AC a piece of Crap?) His wonderful price structure and licensing policy of "Per Provider" as opposed to all the other "wonderful" schemes all of you have mentioned in this post recently; and because of all of the above and the companies basic availiblity to talk and take suggestions, a sense of trust and that the average user mattered to Jon and AC.

Now recently there were some issues and growing pains to be sure, but still the concept of one integrated program run by a company most of us already like our relationship with, seems pretty appealing. Now some of us, ourselves included probably need to see some fence mending, and I for one am hopeful that this can still be achieved it boths sides truely want it and are willing to work at it, but I would still love to see it come to fruition.

I would like to see it have the ability for us to use with a small private contracted biller, as this is really my main objective in the long run. To have an off-site biller log in securely, building in my database and doing our work, all while still allowing us here at the office to enter some basics like what we did collect at time of service be it a copay, a deductable or what we call a PIFATOS for those who "pay in full at time of service".

The problem with building bridges and interfaces is between OS, and two to three vendors constantly updating and de-bugging their side of things is this inerfaces just seem to always be going thru issues of compatability and working well together. So I feel in the long run, although the PM may be a work in progress, it will be worthwhile to Jon, AC and most importantly most of us.

I'll close with this. I had a bit of an issue a while back over one of the PM features we already have not working correctly and crunching the numbers wrong. But our being upset with this was not really a blackeye on Jon or AC, it was that we had grown quite attached to this feature as a means of keeping an eye on how things were doing here in terms of certain numbers, because we do outsource our billing and AC was promoted as having a certain amount of PM in it already. There are even articles on the AC website today where it speaks to these features.

And so we were disappointed that it was not working properly and that we couldn't really count on it as we had been doing. How that all went down was a mess to be sure, but really we were just users who liked what we had because of our situation and simply wanted a feature to work that we had grown to like and depend on. Most of you are familiar with when you log on to see financial data in the Admin section, the disclaimer pops up. The features contained in that section are the ones we really liked. But as of right now, they don't work right, AC does not support them or promise that they will work correctly, and there is this disclaimer.

So even if you outsource most of your billing, wouldn't it still be nice for the doc and/or the practice manager to still have a decent amount of data based on their practice and patients to help them mind the store? of course it would be. For us personally, it certainly is. I can't wait, but I am concerned as to what it will look like and what it will or won't be able to do or provide us with. And not to open old wounds, but if we are to trust this thing with the life blood of our practice, our cash flow and the like, just what kind of rights and protections will we have from our "new" EULA???

In the end, it just goes round and round. We can not discuss the one without the other....

Paul, I agree with the ideal you're espousing. It would be nice to have it "all under one roof", so to speak, but it's kind of like a scene from this movie:

Now, come on Paul, how much will it take to tide you over?

Short of having a PM in the near future, is there any experience with seamless integration of existing technology. I have read of others using EZ Claims for billing and attach to an accounting program. Their website implies seamless with AC and Quickbooks.
Does anyone have experience with them? Any opinion one way or the other? If this topic has already been asked and answered on another thread, please direct me and accept a newbie apology.

Brian,
$240 dollars....
Hey Rainy and I have been at this one I think since before you arrived on the scene. And as far as I'm concerned, I'm still more than a little miffed about all that happened to me and Nancy over our finding out that the numbers didn't crunch right. It was a feature that was "there" already, it was discussed in medical journal articles comparing small and modest EMR's, it was promoted as having these features, and when we bitched to hard, we got our legs cut out from undernether us.

It's been awhile now, but just where did you think all of mine and Roy's poking and proding, sticking our necks out came from over the EULA? It was a direct result of Paul and Nancy sticking their necks out about features that were part of standard releases, that suddenly were not supported or promised to work. Kinda killed the MAC, APPLE,IPOD, Ben and Gerry's (my references to Waterbury VT) feeling around here for quite some time. I was even portrayed on this board as some Shrek like creature who just couldn't wait a bit for a proper fix. Well hey, tick-tock, how long have we been waiting now for some basic number crunching that we can depend upon? Since I first realized that the basic math does pass a simple grade school check?Especially lots of little AC users who do outsource some or all of their billing, who could really use a little bit more PM in there to help us keep those outsourced people clean and honest. One can't supervise what one can not see or crunch. AC was supposed to have this feature since before we even signed on, it was in there all along as part of the whole package, no suddenly appearing months and years later disclaimer.

So pardon me if I and probably many others feel that we have waited long enough at least to see what was already in there fixed and working properly. Just fix what was broken if the other stuff is so far off... If my memory serves me correct at this late hour, then we are going on our second year here now since I first found the errors in the math and all hell broke loose over them. About 13 months and counting. I remember because it was the end of the financial year, corporate taxes are on March 15th, and so it was a good bit before that that I was crunching each month to get a basic handle on them, and the further back in time I went the worse the numbers got. By April '06 one didn't even need to double check the numbers because they were just that far off, way off. Have I been patient enough yet? Haven't we all waited long enough already?

This business is unfortunately all about business because none of us get nearly enough to keep the lights on anymore. If we can't watch the bottom line very carefully we will all be drowned soon. And as I see it, one really does tie right into the other, the carriers and the gov't and all the rest make that very clear to me each and every day, they request notes to spy on my provider, her patients, and to attempt to deny care. How any vendor on either side (PM or EMR) can see fit to release one without the other anymore is beyond me. They are like co-joined twins, joined at the hip and they can not be easily separated.

So please let's stop making excuses and let's get down to business already. Any decent EMR or PM has to have a partner from the opposite side that is it's equal in it's own task. Isn't that just about what everyone here is saying in a round about way anyway???? They need something that is properly tied together across both sides, so they can get the job, the whole job done each and every day so they can get paid for all their hard work? "Man I've got great notes, but damned if I can get paid for any of them." Come on....

Paul:

I understand your feelings.

What are you using now for PM and billing?

Brian,
That's just the issue. I outsource my billing and I'm not pleased with those folks, but it is hard to babysit what you can not quantify. I have arraigned QuickBooks to do some, but only some and was really hoping that the financial section of AC would allow me to track some of those basics; like what we have collected in house, the difference between charges and collections now left to the bill company to try and recoup, total charges per day, week, month, traffice per day, week, month and so too. Heck just tracking traffice allows you to know when to plan a family vacation, system update down day, or CME time, Med Student time, you get the picture.

It's all in there already if the math was just dependable, which it is not. But we didn't get the disclaimer until we had the issue over what I had found. It's a post facto disclaimer and that just doesn't sit right with us and a number of other people. Roy and I like to point to the website that promotes "Guardian Angel" support, that is then contradicted in the fine print of the EULA, that most of us were just "clicking" on to get our updates, not knowing that is was changing and not in the consumers best interests. We would like to see both sides "match" even if it is less than perfect, at least that is straight up and everyone knows where they stand.

But the real question is; why can't we get an agreement that protects and defines some decent rights as well as appropriate limits for both parties in this relationship? And this comes up because the nuclear option was used in the past, so the terms that are in there are in there for a real intended purpose.

Anyway, we have chewed on these issues before in other threads and as of yet we have not heard a satisfying response to our concerns. But the need to be able to connect and seemlessly move back and forth and across, from the documented encounter to the finacial side that comes directly from that encounter is critical and it is what everyone has been saying for quite some time now.

So put me down for my one improvement as two serious request.
1) Protect and define the users rights in the EULA, and have how one promotes the product truely match what is in that EULA. Honestly show what the deal is.

2) At least fix the present financial section and then in light of the fact that AC was having issues of some sort either crunching, storing or tableing the data, confirm the cleanliness and usefullness of everyone's data in the present financial section that has been created all these years. Some of this was supposed to be addressed in previous fixes over a year ago, but seeing that what should have worked didn't, just what does that all mean? And even if we do have a means of sending data across to another product, can we trust that, that transfer and cross-talk is proper? Is this a case of just bad crunching or is it a case of garbage in, garbage out?

Our practice would definitely use any features designed to manage an outsourced billing situation. We are in the same boat as Paul in that we need some sort of check/balance in place with our outside billing services firm.

It's A Wonderful Life, Brian!

Do your billing in-house, that's the only way to know what's really going on. Don't use AC Billing system, it's weak. Use something else. Bert and I use Emedware, but there are many others out there.

I am not computer literate, but I am most excited about the move from Access to SQL. I have little understanding of what this means, but I think that Access based computing was a built in failure point for our practice. We passed on AC (but could find nothing we liked) for two years. Then I pushed my partners that we would go with AC and plan to move on in 2-3 years when our database got too big for the system. Now we love AC and might prefer to break the practice into three small ones before we would give up AC.

the shift to SQL will make for a much more stable database. I can't wait.