4 ms·

Actually, you'd be surprised. There are not many good EHRs out there. It's all about the features and the ability to make the system work with your workflows an

Actually, you'd be surprised. There are not many good EHRs out there. It's all about the features and the ability to make the system work with your workflows and use cases. Of course, your points are valid though! That is the state of the "behind the scenes" side of things :). EDIT: Just saw your edit and your correct assessment of the need for a great UI (we have gaps, but a good team working on it).

hanklazard 8y ago
Having used many EMRs over the past 10 years, I totally agree—there are not many (any?) good EMRs out there. Most are clunky UI/UX nightmares that end up interrupting the visit and leave me frustrated and staring at a screen far more than I should be. I stumbled across OpenEMR a few months ago (as I was cursing Epic and praying for a better open source option) and must say that I’m impressed with the speed of progress. I’m certainly not a developer but I am a physician—if you need any more volunteers from medical personnel, I would be more than happy to help.
- behindmyscreen 8y ago
  90% of Epic's issue is how a Hospital implements it. It is so configurable that compliance and leadership will lean on it way more than they should to drive policy leading to BPAs, poorly created OrderSets, and way too many documentation points that contain low value....Then there is the case of not implementing the features that Epic releases that will make life better for the users because the IT department is underfunded or the leadership does not want to change....and then the fact that many users do not like to be trained on how to improve their use of the system.
  - JshWright 8y ago
    The other issue with Epic is that it's designed for hospitals. The parent comment sounds like a doc in a smaller practice. There are certainly EMRs out there better suited to that environment (disclaimer: I work for one that I think does an especially good job at that)
    - behindmyscreen 8y ago
      There is an ambulatory module that is designed for clinics. The cost of implementing Epic certainly is not within the realm of an independent practice so it is only reasonable for hospital systems to deploy for their clinics and affiliates. I would not expect the commenter to have had an experience outside a hospital affiliated clinic if they work as an AMB provider.
    - hanklazard 8y ago
      Yes, I primarily work in a small clinic setting, though I've also used Epic in a hospital setting and have been similarly unimpressed! ;) In general, I think that EMRs try to cram as much information onto the screen as possible, without enough thought toward what pieces of information are useful at particular times. It's like the opposite of the experience that I have on a well-designed website. Most of my complaints are around that phenomenon, as well as all of the unnecessary clicking / scrolling required due to poor design. I also think that the cost of implementing / migrating these systems is insane, especially when that just adds to our already overpriced health care system. It's hard not to think that companies that build EMRs prefer to be as closed and proprietary as possible, to prevent an easy switch to a competitor. A few things that I do like in Epic and think are generally good features in EMRs: -lots of shortcut keys -saved phrases (I think they're called "smart phrases" or some nonsense like that) -single click connectivity into clinical resource websites and some hospital portals -modern browser support (I seriously used to use an EMR that could only be accessed on an old version of Internet Explorer -- "just make sure you don't let the computer update the browser") -eprescribing My favorite EMR of the 10 or so that I've used was at the VA. (I've heard, though not verified, that that EMR was licensable for almost no cost outside of the VA, but was ignored in favor of "nicer" systems.) I don't know if it is the same now, but it was extremely simple in appearance with some basic fields for writing notes, an image viewer, a quick way to order and review labs, etc. Looked almost like a terminal. Copy/paste functionality. Most importantly, because it was used at every VA in the country, I was able to easily review records/labs/images from, for example, a 65 yr old veteran who had just moved from across the country. No faxes, no scanning. It is this sort of uniform system for data access that we are missing right now in medicine in the US and it is wasting time, costing us a lot of money, and damaging patient care.

hanklazard 8y ago

Having used many EMRs over the past 10 years, I totally agree—there are not many (any?) good EMRs out there. Most are clunky UI/UX nightmares that end up interrupting the visit and leave me frustrated and staring at a screen far more than I should be. I stumbled across OpenEMR a few months ago (as I was cursing Epic and praying for a better open source option) and must say that I’m impressed with the speed of progress. I’m certainly not a developer but I am a physician—if you need any more volunteers from medical personnel, I would be more than happy to help.

behindmyscreen 8y ago
90% of Epic's issue is how a Hospital implements it. It is so configurable that compliance and leadership will lean on it way more than they should to drive policy leading to BPAs, poorly created OrderSets, and way too many documentation points that contain low value....Then there is the case of not implementing the features that Epic releases that will make life better for the users because the IT department is underfunded or the leadership does not want to change....and then the fact that many users do not like to be trained on how to improve their use of the system.
- JshWright 8y ago
  The other issue with Epic is that it's designed for hospitals. The parent comment sounds like a doc in a smaller practice. There are certainly EMRs out there better suited to that environment (disclaimer: I work for one that I think does an especially good job at that)
  - behindmyscreen 8y ago
    There is an ambulatory module that is designed for clinics. The cost of implementing Epic certainly is not within the realm of an independent practice so it is only reasonable for hospital systems to deploy for their clinics and affiliates. I would not expect the commenter to have had an experience outside a hospital affiliated clinic if they work as an AMB provider.
  - hanklazard 8y ago
    Yes, I primarily work in a small clinic setting, though I've also used Epic in a hospital setting and have been similarly unimpressed! ;) In general, I think that EMRs try to cram as much information onto the screen as possible, without enough thought toward what pieces of information are useful at particular times. It's like the opposite of the experience that I have on a well-designed website. Most of my complaints are around that phenomenon, as well as all of the unnecessary clicking / scrolling required due to poor design. I also think that the cost of implementing / migrating these systems is insane, especially when that just adds to our already overpriced health care system. It's hard not to think that companies that build EMRs prefer to be as closed and proprietary as possible, to prevent an easy switch to a competitor. A few things that I do like in Epic and think are generally good features in EMRs: -lots of shortcut keys -saved phrases (I think they're called "smart phrases" or some nonsense like that) -single click connectivity into clinical resource websites and some hospital portals -modern browser support (I seriously used to use an EMR that could only be accessed on an old version of Internet Explorer -- "just make sure you don't let the computer update the browser") -eprescribing My favorite EMR of the 10 or so that I've used was at the VA. (I've heard, though not verified, that that EMR was licensable for almost no cost outside of the VA, but was ignored in favor of "nicer" systems.) I don't know if it is the same now, but it was extremely simple in appearance with some basic fields for writing notes, an image viewer, a quick way to order and review labs, etc. Looked almost like a terminal. Copy/paste functionality. Most importantly, because it was used at every VA in the country, I was able to easily review records/labs/images from, for example, a 65 yr old veteran who had just moved from across the country. No faxes, no scanning. It is this sort of uniform system for data access that we are missing right now in medicine in the US and it is wasting time, costing us a lot of money, and damaging patient care.