eClinicalWorks vs. QuickEMR

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
eClinicalWorks
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
eClinicalWorks headquartered in Westborough offers their EHR / EMR solution, which can be upgraded to a full practice management solution at higher pricing tiers.
$449
per month per provider
QuickEMR
Score 0.0 out of 10
N/A
QuickEMR is an emr and practice management software for physical, occupational, and speech therapists, from Easy Applications, Inc.N/A
Pricing
eClinicalWorksQuickEMR
Editions & Modules
RCM as a Service
2.9% of Practice Collections
EHR Only
$449
per month per provider
EHR With Practice Management
$599
per month per provider
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
eClinicalWorksQuickEMR
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
eClinicalWorksQuickEMR
Features
eClinicalWorksQuickEMR
Billing and Claims Management
Comparison of Billing and Claims Management features of Product A and Product B
eClinicalWorks
5.1
Ratings
39% below category average
QuickEMR
-
Ratings
Real-time eligibility verification5.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Claims management4.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Coding5.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Patient billing5.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Financial Reporting4.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Patient Scheduling
Comparison of Patient Scheduling features of Product A and Product B
eClinicalWorks
3.4
Ratings
80% below category average
QuickEMR
-
Ratings
Rule-based scheduling4.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated appointment reminders4.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated patient check-in2.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Multi-location support1.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Calendar interface4.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Electronic Medical Records
Comparison of Electronic Medical Records features of Product A and Product B
eClinicalWorks
3.4
Ratings
72% below category average
QuickEMR
-
Ratings
Charting / document management2.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Templates4.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Patient portal4.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Mobile/tablet support6.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Fax integration3.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Integration with other EMR and PM systems1.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow automation1.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Speech recognition5.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Customization2.10 Ratings00 Ratings
E-prescribing3.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Medical Security and Privacy
Comparison of Medical Security and Privacy features of Product A and Product B
eClinicalWorks
3.8
Ratings
75% below category average
QuickEMR
-
Ratings
HIPAA compliance8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Role-based permission levels3.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Data backups and redundancy3.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Local mode / networking failsafe1.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow and Scale
Comparison of Workflow and Scale features of Product A and Product B
eClinicalWorks
2.1
Ratings
113% below category average
QuickEMR
-
Ratings
Task tracking2.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Specialty-specific workflows2.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Multi-office / multi-physician capabilities2.10 Ratings00 Ratings
User Ratings
eClinicalWorksQuickEMR
Likelihood to Recommend
2.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
2.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
2.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
4.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
1.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
In-Person Training
2.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
4.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
eClinicalWorksQuickEMR
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Pros
  • 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
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Cons
  • 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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Likelihood to Renew
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
[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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
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).
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
In-Person Training
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • 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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
ScreenShots