<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do Electronic Medical Records Affect Productivity &#8211; Part 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/</link>
	<description>A blog from inside the emergency department</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 13:45:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-108176</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-108176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#039;s a funny take on CPOE in the ER using one of those enterprise systems. Exaggerated, but based on real examples from a vendor who shall not be named (except above in your post).

http://vimeo.com/54299546]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a funny take on CPOE in the ER using one of those enterprise systems. Exaggerated, but based on real examples from a vendor who shall not be named (except above in your post).</p>
<p><a href="http://vimeo.com/54299546" rel="nofollow">http://vimeo.com/54299546</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doc Seal</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-106389</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Seal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:27:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-106389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is the result of physicians ceding authority to non-clinical CEOs/administrators and govt. bureaucrats.  Despite the facade they put forward, the best interest of the patient is no longer the bottom line.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is the result of physicians ceding authority to non-clinical CEOs/administrators and govt. bureaucrats.  Despite the facade they put forward, the best interest of the patient is no longer the bottom line.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JOHNWAT</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-104327</link>
		<dc:creator>JOHNWAT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Nov 2012 16:48:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-104327</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I jumped out of the frying pain and into the FIRE!
The military has a good EMR in ALTA.  It stunk at first, but thanks to an all hands effort (Doc, nurses, techs and IT personnel) it worked better than any I have used since.  MEDIWRECK is dangerous and the programers have never spoke with any active practicing doctors.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I jumped out of the frying pain and into the FIRE!<br />
The military has a good EMR in ALTA.  It stunk at first, but thanks to an all hands effort (Doc, nurses, techs and IT personnel) it worked better than any I have used since.  MEDIWRECK is dangerous and the programers have never spoke with any active practicing doctors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ksccts</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-104226</link>
		<dc:creator>ksccts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 20:41:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-104226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Meditech is multiple generations behind the current leaders, Cerner and Epic. No surprise you had terrible efficiency.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meditech is multiple generations behind the current leaders, Cerner and Epic. No surprise you had terrible efficiency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anony</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-103956</link>
		<dc:creator>Anony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 03:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-103956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice to hear. I find Epic one of the better ones as opposed to the others out there too. Thanks for sharing!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice to hear. I find Epic one of the better ones as opposed to the others out there too. Thanks for sharing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CodeBlue</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-103803</link>
		<dc:creator>CodeBlue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2012 01:43:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-103803</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I trained with Epic and with Ibex. Ibex is terrible. It&#039;s web-based, which necessarily means that you can only work on one patient at a time and you have to wait for the page to load for each change you make. 

Epic- while the ED template we were using was a bit cumbersome, and some of my colleagues had a backlog of charts, could be made very efficient. It benefitted and suffered from the ability to build text macros ie &quot;advised the patient to follow up with their primary care provider. Pt verbalized understanding of all instructions given and agreed to return to ED with any worsening of symptoms.&quot; 
I could add that to a chart with 3 key-presses. Of course, if you have too many macros, your chart becomes useless, as it looks just like all the other charts. 
Our hospital also got all the inpatient services and many of the local docs onto epic, which was fantastic, because I could see office notes and progress notes, which you can&#039;t ordinarily see, and also outpatient testing not performed at the hospital. 
With a template that&#039;s more like a t-sheet with an area for free-text MDM- Epic would be the bomb. 

I currently use a t-sheet with meditech for order entry and records. As mentioned above, meditech is slow, allows access to a single patient at a time, and often locks up. I have no major complaints about the t-sheet. 
Admin, in their infinite wisdom, is going to force Meditech charting on us at some point. Having seen the demo version and read online about it, I&#039;m not looking forward to this. I&#039;d almost rather do the t-sheet for my billers and coders and dictate for my inpatient colleagues (except that&#039;s double work). meditech appears to produce a difficult to interpret, slow to generate, poorly formatted medical record that will not help anybody.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I trained with Epic and with Ibex. Ibex is terrible. It&#8217;s web-based, which necessarily means that you can only work on one patient at a time and you have to wait for the page to load for each change you make. </p>
<p>Epic- while the ED template we were using was a bit cumbersome, and some of my colleagues had a backlog of charts, could be made very efficient. It benefitted and suffered from the ability to build text macros ie &#8220;advised the patient to follow up with their primary care provider. Pt verbalized understanding of all instructions given and agreed to return to ED with any worsening of symptoms.&#8221;<br />
I could add that to a chart with 3 key-presses. Of course, if you have too many macros, your chart becomes useless, as it looks just like all the other charts.<br />
Our hospital also got all the inpatient services and many of the local docs onto epic, which was fantastic, because I could see office notes and progress notes, which you can&#8217;t ordinarily see, and also outpatient testing not performed at the hospital.<br />
With a template that&#8217;s more like a t-sheet with an area for free-text MDM- Epic would be the bomb. </p>
<p>I currently use a t-sheet with meditech for order entry and records. As mentioned above, meditech is slow, allows access to a single patient at a time, and often locks up. I have no major complaints about the t-sheet.<br />
Admin, in their infinite wisdom, is going to force Meditech charting on us at some point. Having seen the demo version and read online about it, I&#8217;m not looking forward to this. I&#8217;d almost rather do the t-sheet for my billers and coders and dictate for my inpatient colleagues (except that&#8217;s double work). meditech appears to produce a difficult to interpret, slow to generate, poorly formatted medical record that will not help anybody.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anony</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-103771</link>
		<dc:creator>Anony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-103771</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Any opinions on the Epic Systems?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any opinions on the Epic Systems?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JustADoc</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-103753</link>
		<dc:creator>JustADoc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:14:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-103753</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the family doc point of view:
I worked in an access clinic(reduced cost for low income patients) as a locums for awhile after residency and before joining my practice. It used paper charts. I saw 27-30 patients a day from 8a-5p with a 90 min lunch(which I took, left for lunch by 12:15 and got back minutes before 2pm). I was out the door with all charting done by the latest at 5:05pm every single day.

I now have a wonderful EMR. In clinic from 9a-5p(with hospital beforehand) with 90 minute lunch. Rarely done with the AM clinic before 1pm and notes are never done by then. Lunch is maybe 20 minutes on average. Out of office 5:30-5:45 and frequently do some notes from home or come in early on days I have lower hospital census to do charting/paperwork(yeah, still lots of that with our &#039;paperless&#039; system). So fewer patients seen in a longer time and have to do work when &#039;off&#039; from home. 
BTW, it is no easier to hunt down an old ECHO/stress test/consultant note/last lipid panel/etc with the EMR than it was with a well-organized paper chart.
And no, our EMR does not communicate with the hospital nor any local consultant.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From the family doc point of view:<br />
I worked in an access clinic(reduced cost for low income patients) as a locums for awhile after residency and before joining my practice. It used paper charts. I saw 27-30 patients a day from 8a-5p with a 90 min lunch(which I took, left for lunch by 12:15 and got back minutes before 2pm). I was out the door with all charting done by the latest at 5:05pm every single day.</p>
<p>I now have a wonderful EMR. In clinic from 9a-5p(with hospital beforehand) with 90 minute lunch. Rarely done with the AM clinic before 1pm and notes are never done by then. Lunch is maybe 20 minutes on average. Out of office 5:30-5:45 and frequently do some notes from home or come in early on days I have lower hospital census to do charting/paperwork(yeah, still lots of that with our &#8216;paperless&#8217; system). So fewer patients seen in a longer time and have to do work when &#8216;off&#8217; from home.<br />
BTW, it is no easier to hunt down an old ECHO/stress test/consultant note/last lipid panel/etc with the EMR than it was with a well-organized paper chart.<br />
And no, our EMR does not communicate with the hospital nor any local consultant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ThorMD</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-103733</link>
		<dc:creator>ThorMD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-103733</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The difference is that it takes me 15 seconds to check all the necessary boxes in the paper record.  Then the secretary who gets paid $20 an hour enters them.  In the EMR, it takes me 50 clicks and 5 minutes to order the same amount of stuff.  I get paid a little more than $20 an hour.  One seems a lot more cost effective than the other.  By my calculation, the secretary pays for itself if I see 1 patient per hour.

Furthermore, it&#039;s easier to multitask with a paper record.  I can check boxes and write orders while I&#039;m standing in the room with the patient.  But I can&#039;t do that as easily with the computer EMR.  Again, if I glance down at my paper while talking to the patient and check some boxes, they don&#039;t get upset if I lose eye contact for 10 seconds.  But they get annoyed if I log onto the computer and look away from them for 3 minutes while clicking on the computer.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The difference is that it takes me 15 seconds to check all the necessary boxes in the paper record.  Then the secretary who gets paid $20 an hour enters them.  In the EMR, it takes me 50 clicks and 5 minutes to order the same amount of stuff.  I get paid a little more than $20 an hour.  One seems a lot more cost effective than the other.  By my calculation, the secretary pays for itself if I see 1 patient per hour.</p>
<p>Furthermore, it&#8217;s easier to multitask with a paper record.  I can check boxes and write orders while I&#8217;m standing in the room with the patient.  But I can&#8217;t do that as easily with the computer EMR.  Again, if I glance down at my paper while talking to the patient and check some boxes, they don&#8217;t get upset if I lose eye contact for 10 seconds.  But they get annoyed if I log onto the computer and look away from them for 3 minutes while clicking on the computer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pat</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/10/do-electronic-medical-records-affect-productivity-part-2/#comment-103708</link>
		<dc:creator>pat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:25:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8697#comment-103708</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[so is it safe to assume that paper records would still require you to write orders/labs and complete discharge documentation?  would you still not be looking at old medical records (waiting for a chart from the file room??), writing admit/transfer orders?  so not all of this is &quot;additional&quot; time due to the EMR, some of the time would have been spent completing these tasks regardless of type of medical record?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>so is it safe to assume that paper records would still require you to write orders/labs and complete discharge documentation?  would you still not be looking at old medical records (waiting for a chart from the file room??), writing admit/transfer orders?  so not all of this is &#8220;additional&#8221; time due to the EMR, some of the time would have been spent completing these tasks regardless of type of medical record?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
