CentralReach, headquartered in Ft. Lauderdale, is a provider of electronic medical record (EMR), practice management, and clinical solutions that enable Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) and related behavioral health practices to deliver quality autism care for superior outcomes. The company supports ABA space with solutions including precision teaching, clinical data collection, scheduling, billing and learning management. Boasting users among more than 100,000 clinicians and educators,…
N/A
eClinicalWorks
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
eClinicalWorks headquartered in Westborough offers their EHR / EMR solution, which can be upgraded to a full practice management solution at higher pricing tiers.
We've used multiple systems for multiple features that we now use CR for, such as Catalyst for data collection, VB MAPP APP for VB Mapp Assessments, Relias for Learner Management systems, Google Docs for scheduling and file management, etc. CR really incorporates the useful …
The user functionality is intuitive. The customer service is beyond other products which allows you to be more efficient and effective at using the system. Also, entering programming which is the primary use is very easy and also intuitive. Many parts of the system are …
When we did the evaluation (about 10 years ago now) eClinicalWorks had a similar featureset, but was designed as a modular cost platform, so if you had certain features you could choose to add them, or not add them which then impacted the total cost. Most of the other products …
I was attracted by the final note format of ECW. I said then and still say that most EMR's clinical notes are terrible to try to read and follow in orderly fashion by comparison...BUT the devil is in the data entry and that is where "you live" as a clinician. Incredibly …
I think eClinicalWorks and Evident are similar. eClinicalWorks has the better software. Evident has the better customer service. I think Cerner stands out above both.
We selected eClinicalWorks because it had great reviews. We do find that it is much easier to use than Medisoft. Our employees tend to feel that it is a little easier to transition between the patient area and the exam area.
eClinicalWorks is easy to learn from a staff and provider standpoint. Tabs/links are clear and concise. Just by playing around with the system for a few hours, I was able to learn most of the important tabs/headings.
Lowest cost of entry compared to other EMRs we had experience in implementing. Our customers were not ready to spend seven figures on large EMR systems they will be locked in for eight to ten years down the road. They also did not want to store a lot of local data on expensive …
eClinicalWorks is above average for primary care outpatient services. It is not my favorite but it is not the worst either. ECW was selected by the group prior to my arrival so I cannot speak to why it was selected. I had an easy time adopting it but I have an extensive …
At the end of the day, the EHR systems do many things similarly. How each system does things may vary, but what stands out to the providers, clinical team and administration are the following few things. The providers and clinical team want to have an ease of use in the …
eClinicalWorks has a better user interface than the other products because it allows the user to navigate seamlessly between the progress note and chart. In addition, all information is easy to find based on the design. Their triggers and order sets are comprehensive allowing …
I've also used NextGen and Epic. I believe that Epic is by far the best EHR on the market for medium-large healthcare organizations. There are downsides however including the cost of the Epic solution which makes it cost prohibitive for some organizations to implement Epic. …
CentralReach is a great practice management software for companies large or small. It is best suited for healthcare agencies that provide ABA therapy but can be used by practices that provide Speech Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Physical Therapy, or Mental Health services. The software allows full integration across multiple departments and is very customizable to your PMS needs.
If you love clicking around in a pretty EMR all day long then this is the EMR for you. [However, I believe] if you are looking for efficiency and support, you should look elsewhere. [I feel] this is an EMR clearly designed by the tech world without much attention or care for those who use it and if you look at the reviews carefully you see that most of the people who love it are in IT.
Access to patient's records - obvious lack of file and charts; transportable ; multi user synchronous access
Produces clinical note as end product that is organized and "readable" as opposed to the gibberish output of many EMR's that look like a poorly formatted FORTRAN printouts
CentralReach is a very robust software and sometimes it's hard to navigate or understand the system.
The CentralReach support team is not always quick to respond to questions or errors.
CentralReach has had a lot of latency issues recently which has caused the system to go down, making it impossible for end users to complete their job responsibilities.
Meaningful Use Reports should be capturing data in real time and generated fairly quickly instead of the MAQ dashboard extraction process.
Their support teams are not very helpful at certain topics such as the definition/logic of Meaningful Use calculations. These are generally difficult to determine but several cases in regards to Meaningful Use take several days before it gets addressed.
Training videos would be helpful on their support website.
If we had an option to easily switch to another EMR product we would. However, an EMR keeps you invested solidly in it - once you've started you're then going to be stuck with it. The investment into the data in the system are such that you have no real option to back out of what you are in and move into something else. Again, if we could, we would immediately move to another EMR. The ability to use it and be supported by the vendor has decreased nearly to the point of inability to use.
[In my opinion] the features allowed by the system are not designed for providers. [I think] the systems are inefficient, and new features tend to be "bolt on" features either as products purchased and added from other providers or simply a module created and strapped onto the software. There doesn't seem to be much idea around making things easier for the provider, though they like to state that provider burnout is something they are working on.
I often cannot assign a proper diagnosis under the assessment section; and as mentioned, sometimes (about once a month) the dictation just freezes because "the request has timed out" (even restarting the iPhone/ laptop does not help).
You put in support cases through a support portal. [I believe] for no apparent reason, the company decided that their support cannot have access to actual patient records and as a result, it's required that they have to connect remotely to a computer system in our network, and log in as one of our users to do anything. This also entails that they are completely incapable of diagnosing problems and require significant amounts of user input and time to try and begin any sort of work on the problems. [In my opinion] this takes away from patient care and other concerns. Also, while you can put in as detailed a ticket as you want, when you are called, you have to go over the ticket again, as they don't seem to read or care what you put in, as it's more important to them to go over everything in painful detail. Often times you must explain to the tech how the process works. In the past month, we were upgraded overnight with zero warning, which caused issues the following day as we had to update every single computer in our network (over 300) and it requires administrative privileges so couldn't be done by a user. This also doesn't update any information in the programs list, so there's no way to tell whether the update happened or not.
Paid for training, did not help. They trained prior to go-live, but it was so long ahead that users weren't able to function well when it actually happened, they seemed unable to provide adequate support. [In my experience] further support is typically very boilerplate, and is thus not useful, and has additional cost.
It's very important to limit your schedule during the weeks after go live but it is equally important to have a resource that is the lead at the practice that ensures that milestones are met leading up to the go-live date. Someone must be the point person at the practice otherwise milestones will be missed and the implementation will run into problems.
We've used multiple systems for multiple features that we now use CR for, such as Catalyst for data collection, VB MAPP APP for VB Mapp Assessments, Relias for Learner Management systems, Google Docs for scheduling and file management, etc. CR really incorporates the useful features of all of these, and plus a whole lot more and integrates them so that they work together. We still use Google Docs for some areas that CR doesn't do well with live documents and intuitive file management. All other features have been as well or better served through CR. The upgrade to CR from Relias for Learner Management/CUEs/Professional Development is extreme. CR has far better content, much more variety, is more user friendly, and has straightforward billing practices that lack with Relias, and far better customer support. The difference between those two for a LMS system is dramatic.
eClinicalWorks is above average for primary care outpatient services. It is not my favorite but it is not the worst either. ECW was selected by the group prior to my arrival so I cannot speak to why it was selected. I had an easy time adopting it but I have an extensive history of working with EMRs as a CMIO. As a company, they are constantly work to improve their product
I will just share one area that our organization saw the ROI in a very short time period. That is the elimination of a dictation service for most of our specialty group doctors when we introducec Dragon Medical. This functionality brought a tangible benefit and a significant ROI in a short time period.
