Donnaorr Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 ICD-10 is very specific & details but in practice, the physicians and medical services have found it extremely tiring to use. what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted November 7, 2015 Moderator Share Posted November 7, 2015 not any more than the hit we took from going to an EMR. we got official #s recently 1/4 after starting EPIC. 40% productivity hit across group with 35 docs and 25 pas. and it will never get better. and this is a group that pays based on RVUs.....basically more work for less money.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdawg1986 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 It's not as bad as I thought. I created a bunch of short lists on my EMR so a vast majority of my everyday codes are there... It was a pain putting the lists together but am at near icd 9 efficiency Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted November 8, 2015 Moderator Share Posted November 8, 2015 one nice thing( maybe the only nice thing) about most EMRs is they only give you icd-10 options now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterallsummer Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 I know I am the outlier on this forum but I am a big fan of EMR. Very briefly I moonlit in a clinic (I work in a hospital normally) that did everything paper. What a huge waste of time for me. It was a mess. I ran out of room for my notes. Trying to read past notes was impossible (if I could even find the paper to begin with.) We had to place our labs (eg UA, CBC and XR which was about all the facility did on site) somewhere, wait for the pt to get it done, then go dig through a folder to find the lab results. I am much more efficient when I can pull up the labs once they're ready on the computer, write my Rx through the computer which is automatically checking for allergies, write detailed notes quicker, etc. I actually prefer ICD 10 to ICD 9. I think it's more helpful for in pt where there is a lack of continuity. I would rather know a specific diagnosis such as the stage of a particular disease, where the DVT is, etc. I have gotten relatively used to it and it doesn't slow me down to find a specific diagnosis anymore than it used to find the ICD 9 code then write the details down in the problem list. It also is going to allow those who learn to optimize their coding to bill at more accurate and higher rates. Yes it is another way for insurance to try to deny coverage however proper documentation can help avoid that. I could not imagine a hospital without EMR. I hate trying to decipher consultants' notes, try to find out if there is a recent echo, etc. I know my opinion is not the norm at least for this forum. But like it or not EMR and more precise diagnoses is the future of medicine. The next step is allowing hospital system A to pull records from hospital system B all on the same EMR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.