Free EHR Consultations

Using peer submitted EHR reviews we will build you a list of custom product recommendations that are popular amongst other medical practices just like yours. Your recommended products will be filtered by specialty and practice size. You will also get up-to-date information including EHR pricing, EHR product demos, and more.

e-MDs

  • Head Office

    9900 Spectrum Drive Austin, TX 78717

  • EHR Feedback

Score = 3.76 | nValue = 146

Feedback Date User Comments EHR Rating
EHR systems in general reduce efficiency and increase costs!!! 43 months ago 0
I have been with e-MD for 10 years. It has been a wonderful experience. Easy to use, reliable and effective, until ICD-10 was implemented. The approach, implementation and software development has been mediocre. They are working on it but it is taking them a long time to figure out ICD-10. Other than ICD-10 issue, e-MD's has been an excellent EHR in all aspects and I am glad to have it in my practice. 43 months ago 0
The EHR doesn't convert to ICD 10 44 months ago 0
Better than previous EMR (MD tablet) but getting ready to switch to Athena. 44 months ago 0
Very poor customer support service. Very long delays responding to EHR technical problems. 45 months ago 0
Some functions may be easy, but they are not acurate. 45 months ago 0
Our clinic has used an EHR for over 10 years. I put together the initial network and installed all of the software. I was responsible for the maintenance for the first 6 or 7 years. The system became more stable, so maintenance continues by an on-the-job trained employee. My wife, a pediatrician, started the clinic 20 years ago with an emphasis on patient service. She is well organized. The practice runs smoothly, governed by physician approved, written protocols. We moved from a well-organized clinic to a computerized clinic in careful steps. Though not painless, it was productive. We learned to use our EHR efficiently. There are multiple options for data input. The system matches work flow and we enter data while maintaining face to face patient contact. The slight decrease in speed is made up for by better records and not having to write information multiple times, e.g. prescriptions. We love our EHR. Several of our physicians did the first year of Meaningful Use. “Meaningful Use” slowed me down so much that I refused to continue after the first year. It is possible to have a well-functioning EHR. Last fall, my wife and I retired. We hope the clinic continues to function well. I would like to highlight some key points that could resolve the other issues mentioned by the AMA Wire, 6/8/2014. There will always be problems with standards imposed on software. No matter how detailed the standards are, someone will create incompatibilities. The only solution is to have one program for all to use. The USA has already gone through 30 years of vendor experimentation. There is tremendous experience in the medical and business community. We do not need more vendor experimentation. The medical community needs to get together and implement one program. Computers are now powerful and cheap enough to solve the problems, if we can find the political will to do it together. Medical care is more important than NASA and probably as important as national defense. Our military and space programs are still the best in the world, although we all know they have problems. We need to establish a national department of health care computerization to develop a single program that would be given to all health care workers, along with easily maintained local networks. It can be secure and protect patient privacy. The Application Service Provider (ASP) service model will not work. If all medical information requires the Internet, the applications will be slower and less secure. Running the same program as a closed entity in all local facilities protects speed and privacy. When data needs to be shared, the patient and the responsible, local physicians will authorize release of information to outside entities in the appropriate format. Research and government agencies would have access to anonymous data, but other health care workers could be given patient care data as needed. The formats would be identical. In an emergency, a patient would have secure, remote access to their information (already a feature of our medical record). Having the program run and data stored locally would help maintain privacy and security. If the internet goes down or bogs down, medical care and records can continue in local offices or hospitals. Updates to the software can be done via the Internet. Microsoft regularly updates many more computers than would ever be needed for health care. It is time to have a unified effort to fix the health care information system. This would reduce the complexity experienced by individual practitioners, and allow them to focus on patient care. We can do it if we have a mandate as given in 1961 for “landing a man on the moon.” 63 months ago 0
EMR implementation is very challenging and billing has been my biggest problem. Managing the billing of medicine is an absolute mess, far too complicated and is the most dissatisfying aspect of practicing medicine. 63 months ago 0
I liked eMDs in 2005-2008 or so, but as CCHIT required more, and meaningful use requirements started, and the company grew, it became too cumbersome, too slow and customer service went from one phone call solution to putting in a ticket and waiting a week or more, and then not getting a solution because you were in the wrong department and then waiting another week and then blaming the hardware and not fixing the issues. Uggggh. Also, I have a cash practice, I am a medical home, but proving it would require ridiculous time and $ since I have 0% Medicare or Medicaid. I do not using billing modules at all. 63 months ago 0
What question you are neglecting to ask is "How much time easy takes?" 63 months ago 0
The system is fairly good but the support is terrible. They are non-responsive to calls and rarely complete an issue during the first visit. 63 months ago 0
Despite administrative benefits the EHR (and I have a good one) it slows me down; the "improved quality" that we have documented has come at the expense of accessibility (we used to see 18-20/day, now14/day [per provider] is a 'good day'). Life has become a "prison without walls". My CRNP has decreased to 4 days/week and I am looking at cutting back just because of the increased time requirement to take care of fewer patients. At the end of any day I used to spend 10 minutes reviewing labs; now it takes 30 minutes because of the computer interface. When I use the template for a nonstandard problem (eg. cholesterol, blood pressure, diabetes) the history is almost unintelligible. I convey the problem better with free text (which defeats the purpose of the EHR). My electronic prescriptions have a certain amount of errors (e.g. auto refill on narcotics and antibiotics?? thanks to surescripts) I have many more problems with the EHR but it is after midnight. Good night. 63 months ago 0
I hate it. 64 months ago 0
Needs better billing module. Needs more training time after initial period. 64 months ago 0
I feel their should be one national EHR that all parties enter data into once and that the EHR should be supplied and supported by government. As it stands now, with many EHR systems the same data is entered multiple times at different sites that can not communicate with each other. There is no way tract the immunizations given in childhood into and through adulthood. 64 months ago 0
Load More