eClinicalWorks vs. PointClickCare Core EHR Platform

If you love clicking around in a pretty EMR all day long then this is the EMR for you. [However, I believe] if you are looking for efficiency and support, you should look elsewhere. [I feel] this is an EMR clearly designed by the tech world without much attention or care for those who use it and if you look at the reviews carefully you see that most of the people who love it are in IT.

I would describe the positives as: ease of billing; multiple double-checking mechanisms to properly balance census and cash; clear and simple user interface. One not familiar with AR for skilled nursing facilities can obtain good working knowledge of the day-to-day operations likely in less than a fortnight, and can perform independent of on-hand help in three months.

• Access to patient's records - obvious lack of file and charts; transportable ; multi user synchronous access
• Produces clinical note as end product that is organized and "readable" as opposed to the gibberish output of many EMR's that look like a poorly formatted FORTRAN printouts

• PCC's census tracking is exceptional, allowing for Medicare's 100 days to be managed on the MDS and billing part.
• Cash applications are simple to use. Any errors in payments can be investigated immediately to confirm whether the discrepancy is due to inaccurate write-offs, billing, and even census.
• The month-end closing process is clean and efficient, allowing the billers to ensure all matters for the previous month have been satisfactorily addressed.

• Meaningful Use Reports should be capturing data in real time and generated fairly quickly instead of the MAQ dashboard extraction process.
• Their support teams are not very helpful at certain topics such as the definition/logic of Meaningful Use calculations. These are generally difficult to determine but several cases in regards to Meaningful Use take several days before it gets addressed.
• Training videos would be helpful on their support website.

Incentivized

• Sometimes the platform is slow to load.
• I'd like to see the ability to search for patients using both the first and last name. Currently it's only one or the other.
• I'd be interested to see the ability to change the color of the interface.

Incentivized

If we had an option to easily switch to another EMR product we would. However, an EMR keeps you invested solidly in it - once you've started you're then going to be stuck with it. The investment into the data in the system are such that you have no real option to back out of what you are in and move into something else. Again, if we could, we would immediately move to another EMR. The ability to use it and be supported by the vendor has decreased nearly to the point of inability to use.

Incentivized

[In my opinion] the features allowed by the system are not designed for providers. [I think] the systems are inefficient, and new features tend to be "bolt on" features either as products purchased and added from other providers or simply a module created and strapped onto the software. There doesn't seem to be much idea around making things easier for the provider, though they like to state that provider burnout is something they are working on.

Incentivized

Overall great product. Reporting could be much better and they are working on that.

I have implemented PCC in over 100 buildings and have used it for almost 5 years. I can count maybe 2 times in 5 years when PCC downtime caused an issue for our facilities. I would say their availability rating exceeds a 10 compared to other software systems.

I often cannot assign a proper diagnosis under the assessment section; and as mentioned, sometimes (about once a month) the dictation just freezes because "the request has timed out" (even restarting the iPhone/ laptop does not help).

You put in support cases through a support portal. [I believe] for no apparent reason, the company decided that their support cannot have access to actual patient records and as a result, it's required that they have to connect remotely to a computer system in our network, and log in as one of our users to do anything. This also entails that they are completely incapable of diagnosing problems and require significant amounts of user input and time to try and begin any sort of work on the problems. [In my opinion] this takes away from patient care and other concerns. Also, while you can put in as detailed a ticket as you want, when you are called, you have to go over the ticket again, as they don't seem to read or care what you put in, as it's more important to them to go over everything in painful detail. Often times you must explain to the tech how the process works. In the past month, we were upgraded overnight with zero warning, which caused issues the following day as we had to update every single computer in our network (over 300) and it requires administrative privileges so couldn't be done by a user. This also doesn't update any information in the programs list, so there's no way to tell whether the update happened or not.

Incentivized

If by "overall support" you mean "customer service," only once were they unable to provide the assistance I needed--but it wasn't an important element of my job so no matter.

Paid for training, did not help. They trained prior to go-live, but it was so long ahead that users weren't able to function well when it actually happened, they seemed unable to provide adequate support. [In my experience] further support is typically very boilerplate, and is thus not useful, and has additional cost.

Incentivized

It's very important to limit your schedule during the weeks after go live but it is equally important to have a resource that is the lead at the practice that ensures that milestones are met leading up to the go-live date. Someone must be the point person at the practice otherwise milestones will be missed and the implementation will run into problems.

Incentivized

Have already stated. People learn differently and PCC needs to adapt to that model instead of all eLearning. Offer the client different learning packages.

eClinicalWorks is above average for primary care outpatient services. It is not my favorite but it is not the worst either. ECW was selected by the group prior to my arrival so I cannot speak to why it was selected. I had an easy time adopting it but I have an extensive history of working with EMRs as a CMIO. As a company, they are constantly work to improve their product

Incentivized

PointClickCare Core EHR Platform was selected because it is organized much more cleanly than MatrixCare. In PointClickCare Core EHR Platform, patient EHRs are laid out in such a way that accessing different kinds of information is a lot quicker than it is in MatrixCare. In PointClickCare Core EHR Platform, all of the tabs (profile, census, DX list, progress notes, assessments, etc.) are easily accessible with just one click. In MatrixCare this is not the case, as you must first click into another menu before being able to access other tabs. Also the overall look of PointClickCare Core EHR Platform is more professional and streamlined.

Incentivized

• I will just share one area that our organization saw the ROI in a very short time period. That is the elimination of a dictation service for most of our specialty group doctors when we introducec Dragon Medical. This functionality brought a tangible benefit and a significant ROI in a short time period.

Incentivized

• The platform has helped to increase productivity within our organization.
• Increased workflow efficiency leading to less hours spending time compiling data.
• Allowed our organization to expand the number of business opportunities -- the increased workload is manageable due to PointClickCare Core EHR Platform's usability.

Incentivized