On Tuesday 10 October 2006 07:35, Alex wrote: > Looks good, quite intuitive to use although as others have noted, > quite slow at this stage.
Slow via ADSL from a slow server, but fast as a desktop app whemn running locally in the intranet (especially once all that javascript is cached locally) > Do we really want patients putting in their own appointments? Is this > the intended outcome? Yep, for me it is. I had already such a system (only far more primitive) in place and it saved my receptionists oodles of time and hassle, and those patients who use it love it. Only problem we had is that the old system was linked to our much hated Pracsoft system via an ugly hack and not reliable enough > I would be more interested in giving patients access to available > time slots and indicating preferences with staff updating as and when > available rather than allowing patients to book their own appointments. Why? The patient interface will display only available time slots (= not show who is booked when) plus their own appointments so that they can cancel / move them when desired Patients will be prompted each time they book re duration / appointment type, which DOES improve booking of longer appointments Anything that frees my staff from the dull and stupid task of clicking appointment slots whenever the damn phone rings (all too often) is welcome both my me as employer (= staff can do more productive things) as well as my staff (one of my current receptionists actually studied psychology, what a waste to let her book appointments by phone!). Apart from that, there is maybe 1/4 of my patients who absolutely love it when they can reconcile their own busy calendar with available appointments online after hours without having to waste their time talking to receptionists and asking ten times whether there is no other appt available Horst _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
