Milton Sales wrote: > We have gone from MD2 to MD3. Early adopters. 15 workstations. SBS2000 server > 4GB RAM Pracsoft 3.3, MD3, Outlook/Exchange. > Changeover was time consuming - 9 hours for 4GB data transfer - most of it on > documents. It worked without problems and had a good wizard interface. My > Tech person is MD3 trained and oversaw the operation after a trial on his > equipment. > We are happy. Main issues are speed and reliability, same interface, > improvements in document handling, support - very good, prompt and polite, > almost instant pathology import and filing, patients open in 2-3 seconds, No > ads printing - speed of printing now so fast that for my nursing homes where > I used to do a batch print, I now open patient, select drug, press F9, open > patient select drug press F9 - and the printer spits them out without a pause > or any delay in my workflow. > There is a stationary ad in an automatic screen saver that appears after 10 > minutes inactivity. There are small ads at the bottom of some data entry > boxes. They dont interfere with workflow at all, and include non > pharmaceutical ones, such as Rehab providors, HIC, Psych services etc. > We now use our sheet feeder on our scanner to scan all single sheet letters > into a file at about 2 seconds a sheet, then suck them en masse into the Doc > Handling software to assign them individually. This saves heaps of time and > RSI for the secretary. > Having seen a number of alternate software packages in my travels, none other > than MD and BP have as thorough or safe prescribing components. Some can make > men pregnant, prescribe methotrexate or warfarin for pregnant patients > without warning, or with a warning buried in another window, few check for > disease-drug interaction, Coeliac disease checking is absent in most other > programs. The fact that the patient is a smoker or pregnant or breast feeding > is hard to find in other packages. All these safety issues are in my mind the > most important aspect of any package. If I can accidently prescribe a > teratogen to a pregnant woman, then the software is not worth owning in my > book. Safer prescribing outways many of the other bells and whistles. > Upload Download to laptop is a boon and works better with MD3 > > Things that need tidying up: Yes updates do have to happen with program > closed. There are some shortcut glitches ( ALT X in progress notes doesnt > open Current therapy) that will surely be fixed with the next update. Backup > of documents within the HCN backup system is limited to 65000 files- but is > fixed in the next update I believe. Order of past history is alpha instead of > date in letterwriter. Graphing height and weight - error in older children's > graph - logged and for fixing. > These are minor things but give it the feel of a beta product - and the next > update will hopefully tidy these up. > > But I know that if I try and prescribe an NSAID to my renal failure patient, > or an ACE to my pregnant lady, or add ibuprofen to the ACE and diuretic, I > will be warned about it, and the amount of warning can be reduced if I dont > want them. > > I feel the differences between BP/MD and all the others is that Frank > Pyefinch is both a GP and a computer programmer. The other packages were > written by accountants to provide an appointment and billing package and > tacked on a record system and prescribing package afterwards. This is why > they are less intuitive and often less safe. Many have very sophisticated > database structures to enable data mining. These are features than 99% of > GP's couldnt give a damn about. They want to be able to prescribe safely and > write the occasional note easily and print quickly and check path easily and > safely. MD and BP do these things very well. We are used to MD, they have a > large corporate infrastructure behind them, they have good support and the > largest user base so the best potential financial backing etc.. Frank may in > the end develop a better product, but he hasnt completed it yet. MD is also > evolving further. They will continue to compete closely for years and we will > all be better for the competition. > > Milton Sales
Milton, I feel you're on the payroll. Basic interactions are a function of the included drug database, not MD, BP or any other clinical programme. If you are using the document handling bay in MD, you are doing more harm than good, bloating efficiently scanned documents before storing them. The fastest growing programme on the market, Genie, was also written by a GP, Paul Carr, MD3 was most certainly not. Whilst HCN's support is better than ever before, it still stinks in comparision to other packages. Peter. _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
