Longterm Care EHR Solution Success
Updated June 03, 2015
Longterm Care EHR Solution Success
Healthcare Systems, Project Manager
Covenant CareHospital & Health Care, 1001-5000 employees
Score 10 out of 10
- Financial, MDS, EMR
Overall Satisfaction with PointClickCare
- Ease of documentation for Activities of Daily Living (ADL)
- In system Insurance Eligibility
- In system IRM (CRM)
- Full clinical chart that speaks to the financial application
- More Financial and Clinical Reporting - additionally ability to save report setting and to export to excel
- More Dashboard capabilities
- Enterprise Level Dashboard
- Better Enterprise Level Reporting related to Business Intellegence
Each software that we had previously was best in KLAS at one time or another. However, they were individual software solutions instead of one solution for all of our business objectives. PCC has made it easier for our financial and clinical staff to have one tool that spans the employee lifecycle and that interacts with the different departments. Our facilities now have a real EMR instead of a parsed out product half on paper and half in the computer.
PointClickCare is more suited for long-term care; less suited for independent or assisted living but they are making great strides. Reporting and dashboards could be more robust but by far this is better than any of the other products out there currently for long-term care. Financial Setup is cumbersome and could be more fluent or intuitive with better programming. UI is changing to a more modern look which is great. Training options could be better as not everyone does well with eLearning.
PointClickCare Core EHR Platform Feature Ratings
Real-time eligibility verification
Automated patient check-in
Automated appointment reminders
Charting / document management
Integration with other EMR and PM systems
Role-based permission levels
Data backups and redundancy
Local mode / networking failsafe
Multi-office / multi-physician capabilities
Have already stated. People learn differently and PCC needs to adapt to that model instead of all eLearning. Offer the client different learning packages.
- Vendor implemented
- Implemented in-house
- Professional services company
We used a combination of resources. We did have a core team for setup. For training we used PCC trainer to train some super users then used a professional services company to deliver the training to the end users supported by our own super users.
Yes - PCC recommends phases. I have implemented PCC for two companies. One used the suggested phased approach and the other has used a version of this. My suggestion is to go with PCC's suggested approach. They have the process down, it makes sense and moves forward more fluently than trying to parse it out differently.
Change management was a big part of the implementation and was well-handled - Must have team buy in. The process does not work if not everyone is on the same page and agreeing to the implementation process. Change must be documented. Current workflow prior to PCC and after is a good metric.
- Computer based training was not always up to date with the new version.
- Different people learn differently and at different paces. PCC primarily conducts eLearning session. They need to go back to a model where the client has the choice to learn via eLearning or onsite.
- If you have a Citrix environment. PCC computer based training doesn't always play nice in Citrix. View outside of Citrix.