Manage My Practice

Posts Tagged NextGen

image_pdfimage_print

The First 2011/2012 Certified EHR List: Is Your EHR on the List?

Posted by on October 3, 2010

holding my breath until I turn invisible

Image by qwrrty via Flickr

Everybody has been holding their breath to see which EHR software will pass the ONC-ATCB (Office of the National Coordinator for Healthcare IT – Authorized Testing & Certification Body) 2011/2012 certification.  Some will buy a system based on this information, and others will continue on with their system feeling a great sense of relief that the system they’ve already paid for is now certified.  Still others will wonder if their system of choice has applied and failed, or not applied yet.  All this and more information is available on the websites of the three companies that have been approved via the Temporary Certification Program for Health Information Technology.
*
The companies are:
  1. CCHIT (Ed. Note, CCHIT has ceased operations)
  2. Drummond
  3. InfoGard
CCHIT and Drummond announced their first group of certified systems October 1, 2010 and InfoGard has yet to make an announcement.
*
EHR software companies “…are required to provide complete information on the details of their ONC-ATCB 2011/2012 certification, including company and product name and version, date certified, unique product identification number, the criteria for which they are certified, and the clinical quality measures for which they were tested, and any additional software a complete EHR or EHR module relied upon to demonstrate its compliance with a certification criteria,” states the CCHIT website.  This information should be available on the product websites, the certifying body website and the ONCHIT website.
*
As you are reviewing the bolded product names below, notice that the information is split into separate categories for providers and hospitals, is divided based on the company that certified the EHR and is also broken into complete EHRs software versus software modules.

ELIGIBLE PROVIDERS

Complete EHRs for Eligible Providers (CCHIT)

  1. ABEL Medical Software, Inc. for ABELMed EHR – EMR/PM, version 11
  2. Allscripts, Allscripts Professional EHR, version 9.2
  3. Aprima Medical Software, Inc. for Aprima, version 2011
  4. athenahealth, Inc. for athenaclinicals, version 10.10
  5. CureMD Corporation for CureMD EHR, version 10
  6. The DocPatientNetwork.com for Doctations, version 2.0
  7. Epic Systems Corporation for EpicCare Ambulatory – Core EMR, version Spring 2008
  8. GE Healthcare for Centricity Advance, version 10.1
  9. gloStream, Inc. for gloEMR, version 6.0
  10. Intuitive Medical Software for UroChartEHR, version 4.0
  11. MCS – Medical Communication Systems, Inc. for iPatientCare, version 4.0
  12. Medical Informatics Engineering for WebChart EHR, version 5.1
  13. meditab Software, Inc. for IMS, version 14.0
  14. NeoDeck Software for NeoMed EHR, version 3.0
  15. NextGen Healthcare for NextGen Ambulatory EHR, version 5.6
  16. Nortec Software Inc for Nortec Ambulatory EHR, version 7.0
  17. Pulse Systems for 2011 Pulse Complete EHR, version 2011
  18. SuccessEHS for SuccessEHS, version 6.0

EHR Modules for Eligible Providers (CCHIT)

  1. Allscripts for Allscripts Peak Practice, version 5.5
  2. eClinicalWorks LLC for eClinicalWorks, version 8.0.48
  3. NexTech Systems, Inc. for NexTech Practice 2011, version 9.7
  4. nextEMR, LLC for nextEMR, LLC, version 1.5.0.0
  5. Sammy Systems for SammyEHR, version 1.1.248
  6. Universal EMR Solutions for Physician’s Solution, version 5.0
  7. Vision Infonet Inc., for MDCare EMR, version 4.2
  8. WellCentive for WellCentive Registry, version 2.0

Complete EHRs for Eligible Providers (Drummond)

  1. ChartLogic, Inc for ChartLogic EMR 7, version not noted

EHR Modules for Eligible Providers (Drummond)

  1. ifa united i-tech Inc. for ifa EMR, modules 170.302.A-J, 170.302.M, 170.302.O-V (specialized to ophthalmology)
  2. QRS INC. for PARADIGM, version 8.3, modules 170.302.A-W, 170.304.A,  170.304.C-J

HOSPITALS

Complete EHRs for Hospitals (CCHIT)

  1. Epic Systems Corporation for EpicCare Inpatient – Core EMR, version Spring 2008

EHR Modules for Hospitals (CCHIT)

  1. Allscripts for Allscripts ED, version 6.3
  2. Health Care Systems, Inc. for HCS eMR, version 4.0
  3. PeriGen for PeriBirth, version 4.3.50
  4. Prognosis Health Information Systems for ChartAccess, version 4
  5. T-System Technologies for T-SystemEV, version 2.7
  6. Wellsoft Corporation for WellsoftEDS, version 11

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in: Electronic Medical Records

Leave a Comment (1) →

Nuance (Dragon) Comments on Blocking the Consumer Edition from EMR Integration

Posted by on August 23, 2008

©Lidian Neeleman/Dreamstime.com

©Lidian Neeleman/Dreamstime.com

My August 20th post (read it here) noted that Dragon voice recognition software has been quietly gaining acceptance as a mainstream solution to hefty transcription costs and EMR integration. 10% of the healthcare providers in the United States are currently using Dragon Medical.

Yesterday, HISTalk noted that:

At least one doc is unhappy that Nuance has blocked the use of Dragon Naturally Speaking with EMRs in Version 10. Nuance states “…we found that some large hospitals were using the consumer editions of Dragon and not getting the accuracy, quality and manageability that would be achieved when using Dragon Medical.”

Nuance responded on HISTalk via comment, saying in part:

“Nuance has made a significant investment in building, tuning and distributing Dragon Medical for exclusive use by the health care industry. The integration and engineering required to deliver the ease-of-use of Dragon Medical with all major EMR vendors, including Allscripts„¢, Epic, Misys®, GE® Healthcare, NextGen®, Siemens, eClinicalWorks, Meditech, McKesson®, Cerner and Eclipsys®, requires a Herculean effort, comprising thousands of man hours in developing and testing. As one would expect, there is a premium associated with the delivery of this capability and the resources devoted to further hone and evolve the product to meet the specific needs of the medical end user.”

Nuance also points to the Microsoft model of charging differently for enterprise/professional software and consumer software offerings.

I don’t dispute a vendor’s right to charge accordingly for a product that has taken a lot of R & D to bring to the market, but like everything else that has a place in the medical world, it will cost much more based on the healthcare application. A set of plastic drawers for home costs $9.99 at your local store and lists for $99.99 in a medical catalog.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in: Electronic Medical Records, Innovation

Leave a Comment (1) →