drchrono Practice Management

Avantages: Web interface is very good, particularly with the introduction of advanced task management. Easy to track electronic communication. Appointment templates are very helpful. App interface is great for physicians, but limited since it requires an iPad. Ideally, our Doctors could use a Surface device and have access to app interface and web interface as there are benefits to each interface. Billing Team - staff and support is rock solid. Responsive, polite and respectful of the importance of timely A/R processing and communication. By far, the Billing Team is the best representation of what DrChrono could be. The basic system is strong, robust and could be a truly excellent product with some relatively simple tweaks to managements attitude towards customer concerns.

Inconvénients: DrChrono does not have empathetic listening skills for business concerns, outside of the billing staff. Any and all criticism is dismissed and blamed on the user (see their responses to reviews here). Simple measures that would save their customers time and money (like a Windows app) are ignored. They act like Apple is their biggest customer (no Windows or Android support despite requests from clients). Support tickets are routinely closed prior to problem resolution. They do not allow you to call in to support for assistance, and often it seems like staff does not read the initial problem request as you have to repeat yourself 3-4 times (and get escalated) until you reach staff who can assist with anything beyond the most basic issues. Issues that impact ability to handle patient care or conduct business are not escalated appropriately. Even if a change they make to the system results in mission critical failures, there is no option to quickly escalate to an appropriate stakeholder at DrChrono. Simple requests, like customized disclaimers to limit legal liability when patients use the patient portal, are brushed off despite the risk to their clients.

Avantages: 1. It has a very elegant and eye pleasing layout which is the main reason I believe I tried this software. Navigating through the system is overall intuitive and generally easy to use. 2. It has a great functionality with the IPAD and that is why it has been awarded the best system on the IPAD. I don't even use my lap top to see patients. I use my iPad and then I supplemented this with my lap top. Most functions that are done on the laptop can be done on the iPad. This includes setting electronic prescription. In fact, some things are better done on the iPad such as reviewing the records and chart. 3. Electronic prescription is easy. 4. The system has a great fax capability with ability to fax almost from any screen and to fax most documents. 5. Dictation: The interface with dragon is decent although could be better compared to other EMR. The M-mode dictation that comes with the program is great. While the recognition is slightly below dragon, the M-mode dictation has the advantage of being portable as it is used with the iPhone are iPad. The downside, however, is that he cannot be used on a laptop. However, I really like the M-mode feature and use this more than dragon. 6. Cloud base which can be accessed from anywhere where there is internet and from most devices. ( It cannot be accessed from none appple Smart devices - Smart phones or tablets). 7. Notes and documents are automatically saved in an external third party cloud base ie BOX. This is actually a very good feature as a backup to have a access to our clinical notes and documents. This is of vital importance in cases where access to drchrono is not possible such as going to another system. The downside to this, however, is that certain parts of the chart (phone messages or email messages for example) are not stored in this third party system

Inconvénients: 1. Lack of awareness of what a true legal chart is: As much as I like this system, this is the main reason why I may have to leave and find another system. They are totally clueless as to the difference between what a end-user sees in the software and what the complete chart looks like when requested from an outside source. There is a huge difference and the company do not appreciate this difference. If an outside agency (DEA, medical board or an attorney) ask for the complete medical records, the clinical notes and documents stored at the BOX account can be easily exported. However, communications between you and the patient by phone or email are not stored in the box account and not included in this information. When I have spoken with them about this, they inform me that I could simply print each phone or email encounter. This however is completely ludicrous - as in supposed the patient has 100 phone or email encounters.
For unknown reasons, in refilling the same medications from visit to visit, it simply takes it out of the medication list that is generated in the complete dictated notes. This gets very confusing especially for an outside agency that is reviewing the chart. Its is completely confusing as to what medication the patient is taking at the time of the visit. For example, if I have a patient who is on OxyContin 80 mg twice a day, gets a refill on this medication, it takes it off the medication list in the completed dictated note. This creates mass confusion. The way it appears in the signed completed note, is as if this patient was not on any opioids at all, but then all of sudden, I prescribed them a very high dose of 80 mg OxyContin twice a day. (This would be malpractice). This creates absolute confusion especially if my chart is being reviewed by the medical board or the DEA.
Furthermore, the signed dictated note does not include the number of medications prescribed. So for example in the case of this person who was getting OxyContin 80 mg twice a day, the note does not include that the total count of the prescription given such as #60 or #480. This makes a difference to a DEA offcer who is reviewing the records. Again, when I have discussed this with drchrono, they simply state that review of the medication history in the software can tell this information. However, they do not recognize that the only thing an outside chart reviewer has access to is signed clinical notes and not the complete electronic medical records. Again, this shows that they are clueless about difference of what the software end-user sees and what an outside reviewer has access to. 2. Templates are still in their infancy and generally they are limited compared to other EMRS. 3. Customer service: They responded very quickly to support tickets. Generally, if there is an major system wide issue it get results rather quickly. For other issues, it tends not to be resolved in a timely fashion or not at all.