Practice fusion

[Guest guest]

I have been switching over to electronic medical records using

Practicefusion.com. Is anyone else using it? I like it thus far, especially

because it is free. The only bottleneck is scanning and uploading labs and

paperwork.

 

Sean

[Guest guest]

Just keep in mind that Practice Fusion can sell your charts/data for money

to researchers doing longitudinal studies, etc.. That's part of their " free "

business model.

 

http://practicefusion.typepad.com/weblog/2009/07/how-can-healthcare-software-be-\

free-chris-anderson-has-the-answer.html

 

J

 

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Sean Doherty <sean wrote:

 

> I have been switching over to electronic medical records using

> Practicefusion.com. Is anyone else using it? I like it thus far,

> especially because it is free. The only bottleneck is scanning and

> uploading labs and paperwork.

>

> Sean

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I am guessing you think this is a bad thing? I don't mind. They are HIPPA

compliant and the patient's personal information is more secure than the paper

charts in my office (someone could easily break a window and get access). If

you are uncomfortable with the selling of chart info (minus patient personal

info), then you probably shouldn't bill insurance or use a credit card either.

 

Sean

 

 

On Feb 12, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Joy Keller wrote:

 

> Just keep in mind that Practice Fusion can sell your charts/data for money

> to researchers doing longitudinal studies, etc.. That's part of their " free "

> business model.

>

>

http://practicefusion.typepad.com/weblog/2009/07/how-can-healthcare-software-be-\

free-chris-anderson-has-the-answer.html

>

> J

>

> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Sean Doherty <sean wrote:

>

> > I have been switching over to electronic medical records using

> > Practicefusion.com. Is anyone else using it? I like it thus far,

> > especially because it is free. The only bottleneck is scanning and

> > uploading labs and paperwork.

> >

> > Sean

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Ah...no, Sean. Those assumptions do not apply to me.

 

I'm all for web-based EMR/PM applications. I think they're great and we

should all be using one. I spent 10 years in the corporate/tech industry for

a large database/software application company prior to being an LAc and am

well aware of the benefits of using such a service.

 

I think that should someone chose to work with Practice Fusion, one needs to

know that their patient information will be data-mined without specific

permission being granted for each instance. What that essentially means is

that the practitioner does not " own " their patient data but rather it

becomes the property of Practice Fusion to use as they deem profitable. Not

all practitioner's looking into this particular service may realize that so

I thought it prudent to point it out. It may be a free service but that

doesn't mean there isn't a cost.

 

I did not give an opinion one way or the other regarding Practice Fusion or

the selling of chart information. However, I will now state that I prefer to

own my patient data and to have the authority to grant or deny access to

said data. I am pro-research and if I thought that I had something in my

database to contribute to a longitudinal study I would provide that specific

data to the specific researchers. I am against having another entity own my

data and have access to it without my permission or without knowing when/how

that data is being accessed or used. For this reason, I personally would

choose not to use Practice Fusion. Other practitioners may not have that

same preference and would choose to use them. There is no " right " or " wrong "

here with regards to either decision. Just personal preference.

 

FYI - there are many open-source EMR/PM applications out there that are

free, that do not take ownership of the practitioner's data and do not use

the data for data-mining. Just google for them. Look for ones that have a

strong community following as those are the ones that will have the most

support and feature enhancements and longevity (open-source software isn't

without its risks, either, but it is really gaining momentum in the EMR

world which is what creates stability in an open-source application).

 

Also, if one's data is available for being data-mined for research purposes,

one's HIPAA (not HIPPA) Privacy Policy needs to specifically state that use

and one should have a back-up plan for those patients who do not want their

data used in that way.

 

J

 

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Sean Doherty <sean wrote:

 

> I am guessing you think this is a bad thing? I don't mind. They are HIPPA

> compliant and the patient's personal information is more secure than the

> paper charts in my office (someone could easily break a window and get

> access). If you are uncomfortable with the selling of chart info (minus

> patient personal info), then you probably shouldn't bill insurance or use a

> credit card either.

>

> Sean

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Joy,

I realize this comes down to personal preference, am not trying to define right

and wrong, and appreciate your desire for transparency.

Just to be clear though, my take on this thread thus far is:

1) I introduced practice fusion,

2) you made a statement about their model not being necessarily " free " and

pointed out their sale of data, leaving me to assume you were not in approval

3) you said my assumption that you were not in favor was false, and then went on

to outline why are not in favor of their practice of data-mining

 

Practice fusion states on their site that the practitioner will always own their

data, and that you can export your data at any time. If they were to fold, you

could get your files and move to someone else. Their tech support has been very

responsive at answering the few questions I have had to date, so I asked them

about this issue. They said they aren't currently selling anonymized patient

data, although may do so at some point in the future, but it would require a

change to their current Privacy Policy, and that you could opt out.

 

" I'm all for web-based EMR/PM applications. I think they're great and we should

all be using one. "

 

Are you using one now, Joy? If so, would you mind sharing what your pick is?

 

Thanks for the heads up on there being other programs. I was aware, and have

looked at a number of free and pay options, non web-based, and web-based. I

have been using OfficeAlly for about 1 1/2 years for electronic billing, and

they also have an EMR component, but I don't like the UI. Same for the others.

 

Like I said before, I am personally not so confident that data isn't also being

used in ways that I am not aware of when I do insurance billing.

 

The naturopaths in Vermont ended up making use of a BC/BS internal study showing

that covering naturopaths as primary care practitioners did not raise costs. The

study was subpoenaed in court and became part of the public record, which

allowed them access. They ultimately used it in their favor, and are now

covered by insurance as PCPs. This, I know, is not analogous to having access

to chart notes, and it was originally an internal study, not just sold to

whoever has the cash. I only offer it as one example of how data ends up in

places you don't necessarily expect.

 

 

" Also, if one's data is available for being data-mined for research purposes,

one's HIPAA (not HIPPA) Privacy Policy needs to specifically state that use

and one should have a back-up plan for those patients who do not want their

data used in that way. "

 

Thanks for correcting my typo. What is your reference for this statement?

I have been trying to find a definitive ruling on de-identified/anonymized data

for use in research. Beyond HIPAA there are state rulings to consider it seems.

 

The following article touches on certain aspects, but it is still vague:

http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2009/09/medical-data-in-th\

e-internet-cloud-part-3-data-privacy.html

 

The following research group states that de-identified information is not

subject to the HIPAA Privacy Rule:

http://healthcare.partners.org/phsirb/deidinfo.htm

 

All good questions raised though, Joy. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Hopefully others find this dialogue useful.

 

 

A separate issue with practice fusion that others may be interested in is that

it is run with Adobe Flash, so you can't access it with an iPhone, or the iPad,

at least not at this point in time.

 

 

Best,

Sean

 

 

[Sean Smitham 0]

Hi Sean,

I'd be very interested in knowing more about your switch. I've been using Office Ally and Practice Mate, but I'm considering the switch to Practice Fusion. How do you do your billing from Practice Fusion (i.e., through Office Ally or through Kareo) and what has your experience been with billing from Practice Fusion? Thanks in advance for your time. Very glad I stumbled upon this thread.

Namaste...

Sean