Unsorted Comments

Unsorted Comments (130)

Prime Clinical

This company does not deliver what they advertise. They have absolutely horrible support and hidden costs are everywhere. The owners are like car salesman and are not truthful about the product. The system crashes and you will spend hours each day trying to solve problems that they blame on the user not their software and go broke in the process. Patients have walked out of my office because of all the problems. Stay away!!! Read more...

The worst EMR I have used.

It reduces my productivity dramatically. The VA and IHS EMRs are much better than MacPractice. I ended up at this site while searching for was to get MacPractice to be usefully for me. Read more...

Minnesota Supreme Court has heard appeal of David McKee MD vs Dennis Laurion

Neurologist appeals dismissal of online rating defamation lawsuit MAR 2012 http://herald-review.com/news/national/doctor-s-suit-tests-limits-of-online-criticism/article_972968c4-78f2-11e1-8852-0019bb2963f4.html State Supreme Court to hear oral arguments about doctor online rating defamation lawsuit. Two years ago, Dennis Laurion logged on to a rate-your-doctor website to vent about a Duluth neurologist, Dr. David McKee. McKee had examined Laurion's father, Kenneth, when he was hospitalized after a stroke. The family, Laurion wrote, wasn't happy with his bedside manner. "When I mentioned Dr. McKee's name to a friend who is a nurse, she said, 'Dr. McKee is a real tool!'" he wrote. McKee wasn't amused. He sued Laurion for defamation, and now the case is pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court. McKee, 50, is one of a small number of doctors who have gone to court to fight online critics, in cases that are testing the limits of free speech on the Internet. "Doctors are not used to public criticism," said Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law in California, who tracks such lawsuits. "So it's a new phenomenon for them." While such cases are rare, Goldman said, they've been popping up around the country as patient review sites such as vitals.com and rateyourdoctor.com have flourished. Defamation suits are "kind of the nuclear option," Goldman said. "It's the thing that you go to when everything else has failed." McKee's lawyer, Marshall Tanick, said the doctor felt he had no choice but to sue to protect his reputation and his medical practice. "It's like removing graffiti from a wall," said Tanick. He said Laurion distorted the facts -- not only on the Internet, but in more than a dozen complaint letters to various medical groups. "He put words in the doctor's mouth," making McKee "sound uncaring, unsympathetic or just stupid." McKee calls Laurion "a liar and a bully," and says he has spent more than $7,000 to "scrub" the Internet of more than 100 vitriolic comments, many traced to a single computer (IP address) in Duluth. "Somebody who holds a grudge against you can very maliciously go on the Internet, post anything they want, and ... basically redefine who you are," he said. Laurion, 65, a retired Coast Guard chief petty officer, says he deleted the Internet comments shortly after the lawsuit was filed and "never rewrote them." At the same time, his lawyer, John D. Kelly, defends the postings. He says it was Laurion's perception that "the doctor's speech and conduct were tactless and inconsiderate." And that, he argued, is "constitutionally protected." So far, Minnesota courts have had mixed reactions. A district court in Duluth dismissed McKee's lawsuit last year, but the state Appeals Court reinstated it in January. Laurion has appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court. The dispute isn't about McKee's medical decisions, but about something less tangible: his body language and comments when he walked into Kenneth Laurion's room at St. Luke's Hospital in Duluth on April 20, 2010. In his online postings, Dennis Laurion wrote that McKee "seemed upset" because he thought his father, then 84, was still in intensive care. "Never having met my father or his family, Dr. McKee said, 'When you weren't in the ICU, I had to spend time finding out if you transferred or died,'" according to Laurion's account. "When we gaped at him, he said, 'Well, 44 percent of hemorrhagic strokes die within 30 days. I guess this is the better option.'" Laurion, who was visiting with his wife and mother, wrote that McKee was brusque and dismissive during the exam, especially when his father raised concerns that his hospital gown was hanging open at the back. "Dr. McKee said, 'That doesn't matter,'" according to Laurion's account. "My wife said, 'It matters to us,'" and they left the room. McKee discovered the online comments when a patient brought them to his attention. He filed suit, seeking more than $50,000 in damages. "The way he quoted me was completely inaccurate," McKee said in an interview. At the time, he said, nobody in the room "appeared to me to be the slightest bit upset." According to court documents, McKee admitted making a "jocular comment" about only two ways to leave the intensive care unit, but said he only meant that he was relieved to find Laurion in his hospital bed. He denied citing any statistic about stroke deaths and said the entire story was distorted beyond recognition. "Every physician gets an occasional complaint from a patient, or even a patient's family member, but this was so ridiculous," he said. "This just seemed so extremely over the top, and really meant to be harmful." In the first legal battle, district Judge Eric Hylden in Duluth sided with Laurion. "The statements in this case appear to be nothing more or less than one man's description of shock at the way he and in particular his father were treated by a physician," he wrote in dismissing the suit in April 2011. The appeals court disagreed, ruling in January that some of the statements were fair game for a defamation suit and sending the dispute back for trial. Tanick, McKee's lawyer, said the case isn't just about someone voicing an opinion. He said Laurion defamed the doctor by accusing him of things "that never happened." Laurion's lawyer, however, says it's a matter of perception. "Something happened in that room that disturbed the four members of the family significantly," he said. More than a dozen defamation suits have been filed since 2004 by doctors or dentists over online reviews; most have been dismissed or settled, according to Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law in California. Some medical practices have even tried to silence critics by requiring patients to sign a form forbidding them from posting comments on the Internet. But Dr. Jeffrey Segal, a North Carolina neurosurgeon who promoted the controversial forms, says he's since had a change of heart; he "retired" them last year in the face of widespread criticism. Now his firm, MedicalJustice.com, advises doctors how to use consumer websites to their advantage. "Doctors need to know how they're being perceived," he said. "If you've got 100 people saying he's a jerk, maybe he is a jerk," he said. But the vast majority of reviews are positive, he noted.Most of the time, Segal said, a negative review can be neutralized "with something as simple as saying, 'Hey, I was having a bad day. I'm sorry.'" Or calling the patient to apologize for getting off on the wrong foot. "Those words often solve the problem," he said. Still, Goldman says it's important for consumers to "choose their words" carefully in online reviews. "We've been given the power to critique vendors in the marketplace," he said, "but no one's taught us how to make sure that we aren't going to lose our house by doing so." Further reading: http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Calendars/September_2012.pdf Oral hearings for David McKee MD vs Dennis Laurion to be held 9/4/12 at Minnesota Supreme Court, Second Floor, State Capitol, St. Paul MN http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Calendars/September_2012_Summary.htm#a111154 Summary Of Issues prepared by the Supreme Court Commissioner’s Office http://defamationlaw.net/mckee-v-laurion-the-defamation-saga-continues/ WHEN A DOCTOR HIRES A PRIVATE DETECTIVE TO FIND OUT WHICH NURSE . . . Read more...

THANK YOU

Excellent research, Read more...

RONDA

SRS is a much more affordable solution and will guaranteed save you money over time Read more...

How much

are they paying you? Every health care blogger I've known gets mad money from PF to hawk their product. So how much are they paying you? Tucker, We are not being compensated by Practice Fusion. Regards, Kurt Martin Group Publisher Progressive Media Group Read more...

Nurse Documentation template to be inserted into Cardiology template workflow

does anyone know how to insert templates into the cardiology specialty specific templates? Is this possible? Does anyone have the contact of a template builder who can give me step by step instructions for how to do this? Read more...

Doctors Beware!!

We are a Family Practice clinic and have been using Waiting Room Solutions since July 2011. I would not recommend this EMR for anyone who is trying to enhance patient care or improve productivity. Prior to purchasing this EMR we had evaluated approximately 10 others that were geared towards small sized clinics. We chose WRS due to it's price and the functionality that they claimed it possessed. After trying the software in our clinic however, we felt that we had been taken by a used car salesman. This system inherently has numerous frustrating features, some of which I will review. Again these are only the tip of the iceberg, and many other flaws exist that are too numerous to review: 1. We were specifically promised that the entire note template was customizable to our preference. The first week I asked for a template that would better correspond with my style of note taking and my response waas that their IT refuses to create any new templates unless a provider's documentation is significantly hindered. Needless to say we had to adapt to their pre-existing templates. 2. We also were promised that dragon speak could be used anywhere that there was an empty box. We explicity explained that one of our providers uses dragonspeak and we were assured that there would not be a problem. After we purchased the software, he discovered that dragonspeak could only be used in a couple of specific areas of the note. When we confronted the company they stated that a new version would allow what we were promised it already did. Eleven months later and we are still waiting. 3. Seven months ago we were ready to link up with area labs so that we could order and receive labs through the EMR. We are still waiting for this to be accomplished. They even made one of our technicians go through online training and pass a quiz on how their bi-directional H7 linkup worked.......We only want to use the system, not get a degree in computer science. 4. Their coding module is the worst that our coder has ever seen. We have lost a significant amount of money due to this system's inept design. We have shown this system to other coders who agree that it is terrible. Interestingly we were contacted by the company who offered to take over our billing for 7% of our income. We refused, and soon after we discovered that many of our claims were denied because WRS had entered the wrong insurance addresses in the system. When we contacted the company they stated, "Well we offered to take over your billing. Just because a claim passes through the clearing house as clean doesn't mean that it is actually clean!" Really?????? 5. The inter-office communication and medication refill requests are so bad that I cannot explain it here. Just ask them to see how it works if you are coonsidering falling victim to this EMR. 6. Other problems include, but are not limited to being kicked out of the system multiple times during the day, excessive clicks to perform anything, (like having to click 4 tabs just to print a prescription) and the lack of autosave when switching to different screens, (consequently many notes have beeen lost. Yiou will learn to hit save hundreds of times each day in fear of losing notes.) Also it arbitratrily signs notes while you are working on them. You then cannot get back in to make changes. Better yet, sometimes a note will just disappear while you are typing it up. 7. No provider that we have discussed this EMR with can believe that it does not even allow a user to crreate a favorites list of medications. These are just some of the annoyances and defficiencies that make our life a living hell since getting WRS. I spent over 150 hours trying to input codes and personalize the system for our providers, but I have given up, as there is only so much you can do to keep a sinking ship afloat. I have used EMR's in the past in the miltary and I am aware of the capability to ease the burdens of providers and increase productivity thyat a quality EMR can provide. WRS is not one of these systems I assure you. The most annoying part of the entire system is the lack of customer support. You have to create tickets to address problems and answers can take forever. We still have open tickets from september 2011. To sum it up, you get what you pay for,. I would not recommend this sytem for anyone. It may work well for some subspecialtiss that only see one problem at a time and do not write for many medications, but it is a disaster for family practice. Read more...

Practice Fusion Appointment Reminders

A great addition to Practice Fusion is the ability to send appointment reminders, by call or text. Read more...

very poor design, very poor support, selective in updates

The system is mis represented by the vendor. It seems a good deal at first, but the add ons are endless. It doesn't do anything meaningful with an iPad. There is a very poor workflow. And, support is available only business hours and they will get back to you! I would love to tell you how great it is, but if I had to do it over again I would not choose this product. I am afraid that many of us buy it because we are enamored with Mac and this clouds our judgement. Read more...

Visit other PMG Sites:

click me
PMG360 is committed to protecting the privacy of the personal data we collect from our subscribers/agents/customers/exhibitors and sponsors. On May 25th, the European's GDPR policy will be enforced. Nothing is changing about your current settings or how your information is processed, however, we have made a few changes. We have updated our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy to make it easier for you to understand what information we collect, how and why we collect it.