Cadence Enterprise Scheduling is particularly useful in a multiple provider, multiple location scenario. It is also quite useful in situations where there are multiple rooms or pieces of equipment that need to be scheduled.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
PointClickCare Core EHR Platform is an excellent platform for monitoring patient data. The ability to generate customizable reports is extremely helpful when it comes to analyzing various kinds of data (e.g administration record reports, action summary reports, detailed census reports). The platform really does a great job organizing patient data in a way that is intuitive and easy to interpret.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The system is simple to use it helps schedulers create appointments and, avoids placing patients in situations where they are scheduled at the same time in different facilities.
It has many reports that can help managers maintain a smooth operation and shows what areas need to improve.
It has a one place for all scheduling information for schedulers to see patient's appointments, especially when patients do not recall where or when their next appointments will be.
The system can be created in such a way that you can control who can make appointments and who can't.
They system when built provides warnings to schedulers helping to minimize many scheduling errors like overbooking.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Questionnaires: EPIC seems to be very stringent on questionnaires and how may can be attached (only 1) on a Cadence level causing us to be quite inventive on how to get questioned answered on only certain visit types. One big stumbling block was the Ebola questionnaire. Currently we have a particular questionnaire for new Phy. Therapy patients which prevents us from adding the Ebola questionnaire to NEW patients. We are still struggling with this.
Patient Itinerates used for multiple appointments: Not very professional looking regardless of how you set up (OP visits, instructions etc: Most practices will not use the itinerary therefore adding dollars to having printing cards with the practice name on them. (the old fashioned way)
Building new DEP records: Wish there was a way to copy entire builds from one DEP to another.
Security": EPIC security is a nightmare to develop for multi faced users. RN that schedule appointments. Many of our practices are small practices that only have 2-3 people (the doc, the RN and the scheduler/biller . This creates the need for everyone to do everything from a scheduling perspective and building this security can become very cumbersome from practice to practice as each is unique.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
It would be interesting to allow for a "post cash" aging view, whereby those who post cash can see what the aging will look like once a cash batch is posted. Otherwise, I have no immediate items which could benefit from imporvements.
As stated earlier, it seems to be the best out there, from a built perspective as well as a user application. While some practices feel it to be time consuming (Cadence/Prelude) together others who see the whole integration thru the Epicare and Resolute systems love it. From an IT perspective, while sometimes cumbersome to build, the end results are pleasing and satisfying. We can usually accomplish what we set out to do with the practice vision in mind.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
I have implemented PCC in over 100 buildings and have used it for almost 5 years. I can count maybe 2 times in 5 years when PCC downtime caused an issue for our facilities. I would say their availability rating exceeds a 10 compared to other software systems.
EPIC has been great in their support and communication at all hours. They also openly communicate when an application TS (Technical Support) will be away and who is covering for that person. During standard non working hours - you always know what number and who to call to get resolution to issues that arise at those times
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
If by "overall support" you mean "customer service," only once were they unable to provide the assistance I needed--but it wasn't an important element of my job so no matter.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Use implementation team from EPIC but know what you want and make sure that it=s what you get. You can be easily swayed by lack of knowledge on the application and therefore decisions are made that are not correct and then have to be redone. EPIC including Cadence needs a great understanding of the workflows you currently have and how they will be impacted by your build. We had a great understanding of the existing workflows in the offices, however lack of knowledge on the Cadence IT side, had a large impact on what was delivered as our implementers believed that a standard EPIC workflow would suffice and did not.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Have already stated. People learn differently and PCC needs to adapt to that model instead of all eLearning. Offer the client different learning packages.
Centricity was limited in ability to scale and customize compared to Cadence for our environment. Also the regular updates for Cadence vs. Centricity is where Cadence really shines. Vendor support is also much better with Cadence over Centricity. We also like the robust capability of the reporting module in Cadence over other vendors.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
PointClickCare Core EHR Platform was selected because it is organized much more cleanly than MatrixCare. In PointClickCare Core EHR Platform, patient EHRs are laid out in such a way that accessing different kinds of information is a lot quicker than it is in MatrixCare. In PointClickCare Core EHR Platform, all of the tabs (profile, census, DX list, progress notes, assessments, etc.) are easily accessible with just one click. In MatrixCare this is not the case, as you must first click into another menu before being able to access other tabs. Also the overall look of PointClickCare Core EHR Platform is more professional and streamlined.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The platform has helped to increase productivity within our organization.
Increased workflow efficiency leading to less hours spending time compiling data.
Allowed our organization to expand the number of business opportunities -- the increased workload is manageable due to PointClickCare Core EHR Platform's usability.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
