athenaClinicals vs. ESO Electronic Health Record

athenaClinicals is well suited from a single physician office to an enterprise healthcare system. The only specialty that they cannot cover is oncology that includes chemotherapy infusions (the dosing is very complicated and requires a specific oncology system).

Incentivized

For most EMS providers, ESO EHR is an ideal solution: It meets 95% of the needs for the typical EMS provider, provides an unparalleled ease of use for field personnel documenting patient care, and is easy to implement and administer. Large EMS systems should carefully consider the limitations of the underdeveloped quality management modules for QA/QI programs. Large or progressive EMS systems with an advanced data analytics/data science capability should be aware of the significant challenges and limitations ESO EHR poses for data use outside of the standard analytics reports.

Incentivized

• Athena is able to create a medication list from the patient's pharmacy purchase history. This aides in compiling a comprehensive list quickly, especially when the patients do not know what meds they are on. The downside to this module is that every time that you add a medication that is not on the list, it turns it into an order that the provider needs to sign. There are many times that you need to make an addition, that the provider does not want to sign as an order.
• The patient history module is easy to configure to meet the needs of the organization.

Incentivized

• Exceptional user interface/user experience design that is intuitive and easy to use.
• ESO, as a company, is deeply integrated into the EMS industry and recognizes customer needs better than competitors.

Incentivized

• The cost is very high compared to other programs.
• Some people find the program difficult to learn.
• The billing software requires more work than is described when they are trying to sell you the program.
• The sales staff that we dealt with had the vibe of car salesmen. At times very pushy and the room for negotiation grew at each interaction. The high cost first quoted is very negotiable but they "up charge" for many things.

Incentivized

• The biggest gap is that doing QA/QI is not scalable or streamlined for a large provider. Managing an effective QA/QI program takes an incredible amount of labor and extra work.
• The lack of customization and custom fields heavily limits use of ESO EHR to capture new data points for internal quality improvement or research projects.

Incentivized

Overall the system is good. Actually, this was supposed to be the universal EMR when it came out during the Bush administration.

Incentivized

They are always there. Friendly and organized.

Customer support has been spectacular: Personalized, rapidly available, and very helpful.

Incentivized

Greenway was absolutely horrible. Not intuitive, no right-click functionality, poor integration, and flexibility. athenaClinicals surpasses it in every aspect.

WoundExpert was well suited to wound healing and hyperbaric medical practices. If athenaClinicals had the right forms and ability to accommodate wound care and HBO workflows, it would be a good competitor.

Incentivized

ESO EHR won out due to ease of use for providers and for administration. Other vendors had greater ability to do data analysis, quality management, and customization but ultimately were significantly more difficult to learn, use, and administer.

Incentivized

• The ease of use for providers to complete documentation has had a very positive ROI.
• The ease of administering the software has saved significant money and delivered very positive ROI.

Incentivized