Notifications
Clear all
General Discussion
6
Posts
4
Users
0
Reactions
82
Views
Topic starter
Hi All,
I am curious as to how practices plan on approaching using ICD-10s, not so much the conversion process. We have 75 practices and 17 specialties (round about there anyway) so we are wondering if other sites are planning on having their users actually use the problem search functionality or if there are plans to create and maintain many custom lists? Right now our custom lists are by specialty but, in order to cover ICD-10 problems, we would need to break this out in some way, shape or form (with Physician feedback).
I am just curious how others are planning on approaching this.
Thanks
Mike
Posted : February 4, 2015 4:51 am
*SmartList!
Posted : February 4, 2015 9:34 am
Topic starter
Does that work now? Our providers hated it - we had to switch it out before they revolted. This was when we were 9.8.3 and the problem search was awful if memory serves though (it was over the summer but I forget when we went 9.8.6). Has it improved with the recent releases? I think I will test it out actually. Thanks
Posted : February 5, 2015 8:24 am
Mike, great topic we have 12 specialties and currently use the CCC-problems or I have built custom VFE forms, but with the codes expanding, I don't know where to start. My physicians love the current CCC or VFE forms as 99% of what they want is right there, they HATE using the search function. I would love to hear how other clinics are approaching this task, any and all ideas are welcome. I do know the smartlists will be a tuff sell as they like the current process.
This might be a good topic for a Table chat at CHUG, if they are still part of the agenda??
Thanks,
Steph B.
Posted : February 6, 2015 5:07 am
Many of our providers have switched from using Custom Problem lists to using the *Smart List. It was a tough transition, but once they learned how to use it, they find it fairly easy to use. There were problems with the search functionality with CEMR 9.8.5 but with 9.8.6, we found that problem to be fixed. If the provider gets multiple selections to pick from on the *Smart List and one of them has an assigned ICD-10 code, encourage them to select that code. You can also encourage them to begin replacing existing problems that are not mapped to an ICD-10 code on patient charts now rather than wait until October when it is mandatory.
Posted : February 10, 2015 3:53 am
Topic starter
Thanks for the replies all.
We are still deciding how we want to approach this hurdle. Steph, like you, all of our forms are customized to have quick problem-picks and, on occasion, even add problems automatically based on certain criteria being documented. Our providers love this - this is just not manageable in ICD-10 without:
1. Hiring another dedicated VFE person now to begin working now and
2. Bringing the already slow EMR to a crawl as the code watches for and assigns 10x the diagnoses
Most likely we will steer towards the search functionality while introducing some additional custom lists. Thankfully the majority of our organization understands the limitations we have with GE and know that ICD-10 will be unmanageable with our current workflow - that doesn't mean it will be painless however. As of now our plan to help with this transition is to:
1. Be honest about ICD-10 and the limitations we face. Many of our providers are already seeing the downsides of over complicated forms (performance impacts).
2. Emphasize that standardization will be the future. Eventually we will migrate from GE and any EMR we will go to will have must less customization (in the GE sense of coding) and will force doctors into standard search modules - let's rip off the bandaid now.
This will be a good topic for the CHUG conference, I would certainly attend and hopefully have a more concrete plan to contribute at that time.
Thanks
Mike
Posted : February 11, 2015 8:34 am
