Comments on: Ten Reasons Why (Some) Physicians Aren’t Rushing to Adopt EMRs http://www.managemypractice.com/ten-reasons-why-some-physicians-arent-rushing-to-adopt-emrs/ Technology, Information & Resources for Medical Practice Management Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:46:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Seven Reasons Why Medical Practices Have Yet to Adopt EMR’s « Pediatric Inc http://www.managemypractice.com/ten-reasons-why-some-physicians-arent-rushing-to-adopt-emrs/comment-page-1/#comment-2350 Seven Reasons Why Medical Practices Have Yet to Adopt EMR’s « Pediatric Inc Sun, 25 Apr 2010 17:28:36 +0000 http://www.managemypractice.com/?p=3995#comment-2350 [...] For 11 more reasons why medical practices have yet to adopt EMR’s, check this link out here [...] [...] For 11 more reasons why medical practices have yet to adopt EMR’s, check this link out here [...]

]]> By: Mary Pat Whaley http://www.managemypractice.com/ten-reasons-why-some-physicians-arent-rushing-to-adopt-emrs/comment-page-1/#comment-2200 Mary Pat Whaley Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:55:47 +0000 http://www.managemypractice.com/?p=3995#comment-2200 Hi Brandon, Those are excellent additions to the list. Feel free to republish the two lists as a post to your site as I feel we collaborated! Best wishes, Mary Pat Hi Brandon,

Those are excellent additions to the list. Feel free to republish the two lists as a post to your site as I feel we collaborated!

Best wishes,

Mary Pat

]]> By: Brandon http://www.managemypractice.com/ten-reasons-why-some-physicians-arent-rushing-to-adopt-emrs/comment-page-1/#comment-2192 Brandon Sun, 04 Apr 2010 22:14:24 +0000 http://www.managemypractice.com/?p=3995#comment-2192 Doc's often get a bad rap for the poor EMR adoption rate, but I don't think it is entirely their fault, but rather it is the fault of the EMR vendors. Here is why: 1) Most EMR systems are too expensive. Imagine if a small business had to pay upwards of $6000 for every license of Microsoft Office... how many business would install MS Office? 2) No dominant player. As you pointed it out, too many people are selling EMR's. Consequently, there hasn't been a strong dominant player that sets the standard, so deciding on one is even more difficult. Imagine a design firm having to decide on 100 different versions of products similar to Photoshop? 3) Buying an EMR locks a practice in. Once a practice decides on a system, they are locked in due to the large investment. If the practice doesn’t like the system, if support stinks, if upgrades are few and far between, there is nothing one can do about it. 4) No interoperability. Our EMR, despite being touted with all this HL7 (open standards) stuff, doesn’t speak (computer language that is) with any other EMR's. Thus, the efficiencies one would gain from being able to retrieve data from the multiple hospital’s my doc’s have privileges in, or other health care facilities is non-existent. It is like having one of those 3 and 1 machines (Fax, copier, scanner), where the fax doesn’t really work because it can’t send or receive messages to any other fax on the planet. 5) Productivity claim is misleading. EMR vendors love to sell the notion to doctors that with their EMR, they can see more patients and spend more time with their families. This is a little misleading in my mind. The fact is a doc can complete a paper chart, with their chicken scratch, faster then they can clicking and typing thru an EMR program. I do believe productivity in a medical practice is enhanced with an EMR, but most often than not, EMR vendors do a poor job in setting proper expectation for fear they will lose the sale. Boy, this is is practically a full post for me. It wasn't my intention, but it turned out that way. I just had a lot to say about the subject I guess. Good stuff, as always. Brandon Doc’s often get a bad rap for the poor EMR adoption rate, but I don’t think it is entirely their fault, but rather it is the fault of the EMR vendors.

Here is why:

1) Most EMR systems are too expensive. Imagine if a small business had to pay upwards of $6000 for every license of Microsoft Office… how many business would install MS Office?

2) No dominant player. As you pointed it out, too many people are selling EMR’s. Consequently, there hasn’t been a strong dominant player that sets the standard, so deciding on one is even more difficult. Imagine a design firm having to decide on 100 different versions of products similar to Photoshop?

3) Buying an EMR locks a practice in. Once a practice decides on a system, they are locked in due to the large investment. If the practice doesn’t like the system, if support stinks, if upgrades are few and far between, there is nothing one can do about it.

4) No interoperability. Our EMR, despite being touted with all this HL7 (open standards) stuff, doesn’t speak (computer language that is) with any other EMR’s. Thus, the efficiencies one would gain from being able to retrieve data from the multiple hospital’s my doc’s have privileges in, or other health care facilities is non-existent. It is like having one of those 3 and 1 machines (Fax, copier, scanner), where the fax doesn’t really work because it can’t send or receive messages to any other fax on the planet.

5) Productivity claim is misleading. EMR vendors love to sell the notion to doctors that with their EMR, they can see more patients and spend more time with their families. This is a little misleading in my mind. The fact is a doc can complete a paper chart, with their chicken scratch, faster then they can clicking and typing thru an EMR program. I do believe productivity in a medical practice is enhanced with an EMR, but most often than not, EMR vendors do a poor job in setting proper expectation for fear they will lose the sale.

Boy, this is is practically a full post for me. It wasn’t my intention, but it turned out that way. I just had a lot to say about the subject I guess.

Good stuff, as always.

Brandon

]]>