Most of you have used another EMR. I don't wish to repeat their errors. What didn't you like about them ? What did you like about them?
It's too broad a question. I think a common EMR mistake is trying to be too much like a Paper Chart. Most EMRs become unusable because it slows the doctor down too much. Unfortunately the comparison often is: A nice legible complete digital note vs. 12 scribbled words on a piece of paper. But who said life was fair !
I have tried a few, I am new to Synapse, but will jump in as soon as I have it installed. I liked "getting straight to the patient encounter note entry" without too many hoops. Simply get to work, to see the patient and enter the PE, etc. I did not like the "non-automated" handling of other data and files. I looked at the VA-CPRS system - now that is a monster and very difficult to administer without IT help. Other Suggestions: Mirth - is an HL7 data interchange/converting engine - worth looking at. - is open source project. Integrating with DICOM/PACS servers - some of us who have digital xrays can inport/associate with the DICOM database, several server/viewer programs are out there, and these can also import several kinds of picture formats and save them as DICOM, one example - K-PACS, Comcast and several others. Ajay
Welcome Ajay. Yes, we're all practicing physicians, so the primary use for us is to document the clinical encounter. Everything else is a plus considering that most docs are not on an EMR, and those that are not using them fully. Not sure what you mean by non-automated handling of other data ... Mirth - yes, Cableops here is a Mirth expert and has done some testing of interoperability. On the other hand, for solo docs, it is just another server to setup and maintain [] As for DICOM, my preference in the past has been to just capture the reports. Don't need the images as we can always go back to the PACS server to view them again. I think others just copy a few images and store them in the patient's directory.
