• Product Usage: The product has been used as a platform to deliver wellness content to members and for scheduling integrations with their EHR.

• Strengths: The product successfully delivers wellness content, allows sign-ups for classes, and integrates schedules to avoid double bookings.

• Weaknesses: The platform has lackluster user experience, insufficient reporting capabilities, problematic login processes, unscheduled product upgrades, and a complex licensing structure.

• Overall Judgment: Due to their shift towards becoming an EHR and lackluster user experience, the company has decided to transition away from this product.

• Product Usage: CharmHealth is used as an EHR system, for notes and calendar features, a telehealth platform, a patient portal, and a revenue cycle management tool.

• Strengths: CharmHealth is cost-effective, user-friendly, intuitive, and does not overwhelm users with an array of unnecessary features.

• Weaknesses: CharmHealth struggles with scalability and extensive integrations, especially as the business is growing; minor issues were also found in the scheduling feature and fax system.

• Overall Judgment: CharmHealth was the right tool for the initial growth stage of the company, with affordable rates and a simple interface that allowed for significant expansion but struggles with scalability pushed the company to explore other options.

Product Usage: The product is used by healthcare providers for scheduling, consultations, telehealth appointments, claims billing, and member data management.Strengths: The strength is its API that performed well with 700 endpoints, enabling customization and enhancement by the company’s engineering team.Weaknesses: Weaknesses include problems with Careequality integration and occasional errors in API documentation that do not match returned data. Overall Judgement: Despite minor issues, the product is seen as a good fit for the company’s needs, providing the flexibility required for a unique digital healthcare model.

• Product Usage: Elation is used primarily for charting, clinical orders, and billing, with patient self-scheduling and registration handled through an integrated platform, Tellescope.

• Strengths: Elation’s strengths include easy integration, fluid navigation through patient charts, robust provider database, efficient lab ordering functionality, and a responsive support team.

• Weaknesses: The scheduling interface needs improvement, there’s limited recognition of providers in various geographic locations, and the clinical visit templates, although customizable, feel rigid and overly strict.

• Overall Judgment: Elation has proved to be a reliable and fitting solution for the organization, with its ease of integrations and flexible charting capabilities standing out, albeit improvements could be made.

• Product Usage: The reviewer mainly used Medplum as a back-end solution and data model to act as the source of truth for patient information and coordinating with other systems.

• Strengths: Medplum is praised for its commitment to FHIR as a standard, its comprehensive implementation, opportunities for integration with the wider ecosystem, and its highly knowledgeable team.

• Weaknesses: Medplum’s user experience components are deemed weak, as they did not integrate well with the reviewer’s existing UI framework.

• Overall Judgment: Overall, the reviewer thinks choosing Medplum to create a singular, well-planned clinical data repository was the right decision. They were particularly happy with the support and account management.

• Product Usage: Welkin is primarily used for communication between nurses, facilitating referrals, telehealth sessions, and documentation.

• Strengths: Welkin is praised for its flexibility and customizability that allows in-house feature development.

• Weaknesses: Users are suggesting improvements in the assessment templates’ interactivity and the functionality of the calendar feature.

• Overall Judgment: Despite its minor weaknesses, Welkin is greatly appreciated for its effective overall product and features.

• Product Usage: The product is used frequently across multiple teams, integrating well with various workflows and systems to manage and track customer data, orders, and results.

• Strengths: The product’s strengths include being HIPAA compliant, a user-friendly API, affordability, robust security, stringent implementation, and dynamic adaptability for a wide range of scenarios.

• Weaknesses: A noted weakness is the product’s basic user interface and the lack of some features initially tailored for lab testing.

• Overall Judgment: Overall, the product is reliable, useful, and easy to build upon using its API, making it a great choice for healthcare-oriented startups.

• Product Usage: Canvas’s EHR is used for scheduling patient appointments, logging activities such as phone calls, visits, changes to a patient’s profile, condition and history, and it is also used for telehealth appointments and claims generation and management.

• Strengths: Canvas’s strengths lie in its flexibility and customization capabilities, its functionality that allows users to create automations based on actions or notes in a patient’s chart and its robust API documentation and integration features.

• Weaknesses: Areas where Canvas falls short include the management and generation of claims, tracking patient risk adjustment and quality measures, and also navigating their backend data for reporting purposes; additionally, the system sometimes experiences bugs and freezes.

• Overall Judgment: Despite some limitations and issues, Canvas is a generally stable Electronic Health Record system that provides a higher degree of customization and flexibility than other comparable systems, and it is well suited to those with technical know-how who are comfortable with configuring a system to suit their needs.

• Product Usage: Canvas used for recording chart notes, storing lab information, prescribing medications, conducting lab orders when available, and executing billing tasks.

• Strengths: The product offers a reliable platform with automation functionality, the ability to easily identify the correct pharmacies for medication orders, and a flexible tasking feature.

• Weaknesses: There are limitations with the invoicing system, reporting capabilities, communication tools among providers, medication history tracking, and tasking functionality is still basic.

• Overall Judgment: The reviewers are generally positive towards the product, praising its reliability, automations, and customizable tooling; despite recognizing improvements could be made in the billing, reporting, and task features.

• Product Usage: DrChrono is used as a patient care management system, particularly for storing and tracking medical records, lab results, and prescriptions alongside its task assignment and charting capabilities.

• Strengths: The system provides a HIPAA-compliant database and great API infrastructure, allowing for integration with other applications.

• Weaknesses: The application has a challenging user interface, particularly in task management, charting, and patient intake features. Its performance is reported to be slow, and it doesn’t support real-time notifications.

• Overall Judgment: Although DrChrono is described as a necessary but challenging system, it is still chosen due to its functionality and the absence of a better alternative.

• Product Usage: Canvas is being used as the company’s electronic medical record for charts and billing, recent usage of its task management feature has been introduced, and scheduling feature is being considered.

• Strengths: The interface is user-friendly, the task management feature is effective for managing workload and workflow, and the autosave feature is appreciated.

• Weaknesses: The knowledge center is not as helpful as it could be, locating specific settings can be challenging for administrators, command-driven entries can slow down workflow for providers, and the limitation in dashboard field customizations obstructs quick information access.

• Overall Judgment: Despite identified areas for improvement, majority feedback has been positive, particularly when considering a shift from their previous EMR system, Athena, and would recommend Canvas with noted considerations.

• Product Usage: Welkin is used primarily for communication between the clinical team and patients, with custom-built features and functionality present to facilitate seamless transitions.

• Strengths: The platform’s strengths include its trackability for patients, customizability, robust API, and security permissions which provide a level of control for sensitive data.

• Weaknesses: Welkin lacks a functionality to easily switch coverage for users when providers are unavailable and a feature that correctly links conversations to the involved parties’ account in the case of child-parent relationships.

• Overall Judgment: Despite a few lacking functionalities, Welkin has been a good fit for the company due to its strengths and the company has appreciated the support and responsiveness to their requests.

• Product Usage: Canvas is primarily used for managing patients’ clinical charts, creating claims, and dealing with patients’ claims and profiles.

• Strengths: Canvas offers more visibility and a clearer workflow when dealing with patients’ claims and profiles compared to previous product.

• Weaknesses: Canvas has some issues with system setup, such as wrong population of multiple locations in script ordering and missing data fields when using the claim edit feature. However, these issues are believed to be due to user error and not Canvas itself.

• Overall Judgment: Overall, the product is praised for its ease of use and customization options, with a recommendation from the review to take full advantage of its capabilities.

• Product Usage: Canvas is used for charting, patient management, claims tracking, scheduling and sending reminders and integrates with telehealth through Doxy.me for video appointments.

• Strengths: Canvas offers real-time access to data, flexible configurations, protocols for tracking patient needs, and a robust FHIR API which allows extensive customization and integration capabilities.

• Weaknesses: Areas for improvement include high user interface sophistication, limited revenue cycle management functionality, and a more structured approach to tasking.

• Overall Judgment: Canvas, described as the Salesforce of EMRs, is highly appreciated for its emphasis on allowing users to build their features and regular performance improvements, despite a few bug encounters.

• Product Usage: The medical group uses athenahealth’s Revenue Cycle Management (RCM) tool for billing CPT codes, claim review, and claim submissions.

• Strengths: athenahealth is a well-known platform with an automated claims processing system, compliance updates, easy usability, and integrated EMR.

• Weaknesses: It is not customizable to complex billing nuances, not ideal for concierge practices or non-CMS billing guidelines followers, and it is relatively costly.

• Overall Judgment: The medical group is satisfied with its decision to retain athenahealth due to its familiarity, CMS compliance and integrations, despite its high cost and inflexibility to complex billing routines.

• Product Usage: Canvas is primarily used by the customer’s care coordination team, social workers, and nurses, as well as insurance navigation staff and genetic counselors for structured and unstructured documentation.

• Strengths: Canvas’s strengths lie in its customization and flexibility, Canvas’s attentive responses to customer feedback, and impressive ongoing efforts to improve features and customer experience.

• Weaknesses: Despite its strengths, Canvas has some limitations, such as its handling of reporting features, integration with Claim.MD, a not fully-featured scheduling and messaging platform, and a manual provider directory feature.

• Overall Judgment: Overall, Canvas has been a good choice for the company, providing valuable features and demonstrating strong product growth over time.

• Product Usage: This reviewer uses Canvas for managing detailed documentation and maintaining clinical records for patients in a virtual specialty clinic.

• Strengths: Canvas’s simplicity, efficient clinical notes, and modern UI are highlighted strengths of the product.

• Weaknesses: The reviewer pointed out the limited and unreliable API functionality and the product’s presumption of a standard clinical model as weaknesses.

• Overall Judgment: Despite its limitations, the reviewer believes that Canvas may be a suitable tool for organizations with basic clinical documentation needs.

• Product Usage: Welkin is primarily used for clinical operations and to create complex care plans, as well as e-prescribing.

• Strengths: Rapid adoption among clinicians and a high level of configurability are notable strengths of Welkin.

• Weaknesses: The inflexible scheduling and messaging issues, oversold integrations, and lackluster onboarding process are notable weaknesses of Welkin.

• Overall Judgment: While Welkin has been useful and reliable overall, there are areas for improvement and the reviewer mentions considering another EHR system that might have been a better match.

• Product Usage: Healthie is mainly used as an EMR and practice management solution, including appointments scheduling, patient engagement, prescriptions ordering, and, previously, billing.

• Strengths: Healthie is user-friendly, embeddable into the website, excels in multi-zone scheduling, and offers a flexible API for additional functionalities.

• Weaknesses: Healthie falls short on automating certain tasks, has occasional billing issues, a limited task management tool, and requires patients to log into the app for video consultations.

• Overall Judgment: Despite some shortcomings, Healthie is considered a valuable tool for its user-friendly interface, strong scheduling functionality, and overall practicality for a telehealth physician group. The company plans to continue its usage in foreseeable future.

• Product Usage: Welkin is used as an Electronic Health Record (EHR) system by the company, with features serving as a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system. It is used for connecting with patients, clinical note-taking and review, workflow automation and tracking patient progress over time.

• Strengths: The system offers a customizable interface and focuses on tracking long-term patient progress. It has integrated features like DocuSign and DrFirst, and allows data extraction and management for improving clinical operations.

• Weaknesses: There are limitations on editing finalized notes, the calendar doesn’t show provider’s working hours or days off, and external care coordination is somewhat hampered due to a lack of support for fax. The APIs have certain limitations and the system doesn’t support bi-directional data flow with other platforms.

• Overall Judgment: Welkin’s services have been largely positive, allowing effective patient management and providing a level of customization not common in typical EHRs. While there are certain limitations, the system is overall deemed reliable for the next couple of years, contingent on how it evolves and expands its features.

• Product Usage: Healthie is used for telemedicine consultations, patient intake forms, scheduling, managing appointments, chart notes, task management and storing lab results.

• Strengths: Healthie is cost-effective, user-friendly, has useful patient-related features, and the team is open to discussing changes.

• Weaknesses: The platform is buggy, has poor role-based access control, lacks proper two-way sync with Dosespot and Change Healthcare for labs, and the clinician experience is not optimal.

• Overall Judgment: Healthie is an effective tool for handling non-clinical workflow management but falls short in delivering a seamless and functional provider experience, making it less ideal for scaling operations.

• Product Usage: The product, Canvas, was used as an Electronic Health Record (EHR) and a care management system for non-clinicians and nurse practitioners in a tech-enabled service provider for chronic care management.

• Strengths: The product was easy to customize, quick and collaborative to implement, and priced competitively.

• Weaknesses: The product experienced frequent performance issues, had limited capabilities, lacked robust APIs, and struggled with scheduling and patient data segregation.

• Overall Judgment: Despite the ease of initial setup and customization, the persistent technical issues and a lack of certain crucial functionality led to platform migration.

• Product Usage: The product is being used as a source of clinical truth for patients, documenting meaningful patient care delivered, chat encounters, and submitting $0 claims for compliance purposes in value-based contracts.

• Strengths: Athenahealth’s strengths include its extensive features, built-in Revenue Cycle Management support, and certain specialty-specific capabilities.

• Weaknesses: The main weaknesses of Athenahealth are poor API performance, lack of prompt support for clients on lower-priced plans, and the cumbersome and time-consuming solution validation process.

• Overall Judgment: The user experiences frustration with Athenahealth’s service model, but acknowledges that some trade-offs may become worthwhile once billing through Athenahealth begins in earnest.

• Product Usage: The company has incorporated Athena for over a year as an integrated EMR and RCM solution that eliminates the need for multiple vendors and is popular within independent primary care practices.

• Strengths: Athena is a comprehensive system whose clinical inbox structure is effective, offers an adequate API capability, and nightly backend data syncing via Snowflake.

• Weaknesses: Athena’s data migration process and its API documentation are weak points, alongside a lack of real-time event notifications on patient chart changes, and the system requires creating duplicate user accounts for clinicians working across departments.

• Overall Judgment: Athena is fairly satisfactory but not exceptional, with challenges linked to building on top of it and getting approvals for API use, and would likely be used for existing clinics but might be replaced with a more manageable product for expansion into new areas.

• Product Usage: The user leveraged Athena for various operations excluding patient scheduling (handled by Phreesia) and patient care management tasks (handled by ActiveCampaign).

• Strengths: Athena offered an excellent sandbox environment for testing and its user interface was considered more intuitive compared to competitors like Epic.

• Weaknesses: The user found it challenging to work with Athena’s APIs due to incomplete documentation, and getting support with these issues was difficult.

• Overall Judgment: While Athena was suitable for the company’s needs as a brick-and-mortar practice, the user questions the additional value gained from building custom apps on top of it.

• Product Usage: The company uses Elation for comprehensive electronic medical record management, including patient intake, appointment scheduling, clinical information recording, lab orders and results, medication orders, specialist referrals, and billing.

• Strengths: Elation is user-friendly, similar in format to traditional EMRs making it easy to learn, has good account management support, and has robust APIs which have generally been reliable and comprehensively cover the company’s needs.

• Weaknesses: Elation’s intake forms lack flexibility, their format feels dated, and customization options are lacking; partial lab results access has been challenging and not initially covered by the API; structured data storage and UI customization could be improved; and dietician workflows don’t fit well within the system’s structure.

• Overall Judgment: Despite some weaknesses, Elation was hailed as a sound decision by the company two years after its implementation; this is owing to its user-friendly design, similarities to traditional EMRs, reliable APIs, and helpful support team which overall has contributed to meeting the company’s needs effectively.

• Product Usage: The user is using Medplum for robust data centralization of heart disease patients, with Medplum hosting their data and supporting security and performance measures.

• Strengths: Medplum’s open-source technology, alignment with HL7 FHIR standards, comprehensive documentation, scalable platform, HIPAA and SOC2 compliance, flexibility of access control lists, and the ability to import synthetic data for testing have been highlighted as strong attributes.

• Weaknesses: The front-end tool has limitations, and there were challenges with discrepancies between different FHIR standards and versions supported by Medplum.

• Overall Judgment: Even though some discrepancies and challenges were encountered, the user is satisfied with Medplum’s robust data handling, comprehensive documentation, security protocols, and scalable platform.

• Product Usage: Elation is used primarily as a clinician-focused application for clinical documentation, lab-ordering interfaces, and billing processes.

• Strengths: The product is appreciated for its comprehensive and robust API structure, enabling ease of integration with other vendors and systems, as well as its basic clinical workflow proficiency.

• Weaknesses: The product’s scheduling functionality has been criticized for being a closed system that lacks flexibility, causing major frustrations in data transition; moreover, the depth of its integrations with other products tends to vary unpredictably.

• Overall Judgment: Despite certain drawbacks in scheduling functionality, the product is generally valued for making the clinician’s experience seamless and satisfactory, and its potential for continued use is rated high (greater than 80%) due to its extensible features and reasonable pricing.

• Product Usage: The product, Elation, was utilized in facilitating clinical visits, practice management, and clinical documentation by the nursing, medical assistant, and physicians teams in a virtual primary care company.

• Strengths: The product shines due to its simplicity, easy-to-use user interface, commendable care-first approach, minimal upfront investment, and quick deployment.

• Weaknesses: Elation tends towards less-structured documentation practices, a billing module that didn’t work for the reviewer, and somewhat confusing team messaging mechanisms.

• Overall Judgment: Despite its weaknesses, Elation proved to be a suitable choice for the virtual care company, enabling rapid deployment, smooth operation, and enjoying broad clinician acceptance. However, it was later phased out to standardize EHRs across the entire company.

• Product Usage: Elation is used by the providers for patient care tasks such as pre-charting, charting, prescribing, referrals, and sign-offs, while the administrative team uses it for tasks like exporting documentation, handling referrals, and managing cancellations.

• Strengths: The product excels in its API integration capabilities, allowing for seamless data synchronization between the company’s internal platform and Elation; it also offers strong support and a detailed onboarding process.

• Weaknesses: Shortcomings of Elation include its less intuitive scheduling feature, lack of effective task management, and its bare-bones reporting capabilities.

• Overall Judgment: Despite some areas of improvement, Elation has been beneficial with its HIE integration, e-prescribing feature, and referral workflow being highlights, making the likelihood of continued usage high.

• Product Usage: Apero was primarily used to power all backend aspects of our Revenue Cycle Management (RCM) process, from claim submission to reporting.

• Strengths: Apero excels in offering granular tracking and reporting on each individual claim throughout the RCM lifecycle.

• Weaknesses: While offering a robust solution, Apero could further improve its product by adding higher-level summary features or more visually appealing information displays.

• Overall Judgment: The company was satisfied with Apero due to its tech-forward approach, responsive customer service, and strategic partnership attitude.

• Product Usage: The user utilizes the product as an EHR and RCM system for managing patient care in an orthopedic clinic, from administrative tasks like scheduling to clinical activities like charting.

• Strengths: The product’s simplicity and cost-effectiveness are its main strengths, as well as its robust APIs and webhooks, which allow the user to build upon it effectively.

• Weaknesses: Its major shortcomings are its poor customer support and its inability to efficiently cater to large practices, particularly in areas like billing and task management. Furthermore, there are regular issues with the integrations provided in DrChrono’s marketplace.

• Overall Judgment: Although the product has served the user’s practice well in the short term due to its simplicity and cost-effectiveness, the user expects to switch to a different system in the longer term due to the product’s limited support for larger practices and lack of effective customer service.

• Product Usage: Healthie is used by providers for patient treatment and charting, by patient coordinators for scheduling and following up with patients, and by the tech team for developing a client-facing app.

• Strengths: Healthie enables seamless communication between providers and patients, facilitates group-based experiences, and is described as stable and reliable.

• Weaknesses: Healthie lacks CRM functionality and has shortcomings in client-facing functionality and form-building.

• Overall Judgment: Though there is room for improvement, particularly in client reporting, Healthie is deemed a solid solution that effectively unifies a variety of functions that the organization will continue to use.

• Product Usage: Medplum is an open source headless EHR, based on FHIR and is used by AlleyCorp Nord to assist early-stage startups in creating their initial products.

• Strengths: Medplum’s transparent architecture technology approach, open source nature, and easy access to knowledgeable staff are its main strengths. It also extends FHIR to provide a unique authentication and authorization model at a very reasonable timeframe.

• Weaknesses: Medplum is not yet a mature product and users might encounter unwanted behaviors or bugs. The FHIR specification is also not fully implemented in Medplum, particularly in the search model. The Medplum app, an admin panel, is too technical and limited so it’s not suitable for direct use by internal operations teams or clinicians.

• Overall Judgment: Despite these limitations, the reviewer recommends using Medplum due to its overall modern, open-source approach, knowledgeable staff, and sensible architecture choice.

• Product Usage: Both patients and providers use Healthie, with patients handling messaging, care plans, and scheduling and providers dealing with scheduling, billing, and setting up care plans and programs.

• Strengths: Healthie’s interface is intuitive for both patients and providers, allowing easy navigation and seamless scheduling, and the personalization feature enables the creation of specific educational programs, care plans, and goals for patients.

• Weaknesses: The customization of preset default settings in Healthie is somewhat limited, sometimes requiring requests for adjustments, and flexible reporting options are restricted.

• Overall Judgment: Despite limitations in customization and reporting, Healthie is favored for its intuitive navigation, seamless scheduling, and capability for care plan customization. It has proven to be a reliable infrastructure for clinical operations and the likelihood of continuing to use it remains high.

• Product Usage: Athena’s EHR is being utilized by the medical assistants in the clinic to manage tasks such as checking patients in/out, scheduling appointments, uploading and pulling reports among others. The providers mainly use it to document patient visits and approve orders.

• Strengths: Athena has a robust API, allowing system manipulations without touching the user interface, and it includes an integrated eFax system that manages the sorting and assignment of faxed documents.

• Weaknesses: There is an excessive number of clicks required for charting and templates provided are not efficient as they are. The user interface for certain features also seems outdated.

• Overall Judgment: Despite certain drawbacks, Athena’s EHR would likely still be in use in two years barring any major issues like price increases, large networks moving away from it, or the shutdown of core features. A significant improvement in other EHRs could also lead to a switch.

• Product Usage: This respiratory care management company uses Healthie for their coaching interface, continuity tracking, and connectivity to their mobile apps.

• Strengths: Healthie’s flexibility and willingness to integrate with other platforms such as Zus and Awell were highlighted. Its ability to provide an out-of-the-box clinician interface was commended. They also praised the system’s continuous improvements in developer support and documentation.

• Weaknesses: Some challenges were noted with Healthie’s interface regarding the amount of clicks required for common actions, practice management and reporting, and lack of ease in transferring data from staging to production. Healthie’s inability to automate the summarizing of patient information was also seen as a drawback.

• Overall Judgement: Despite some issues regarding report generation and practice management, Healthie was largely viewed as a robust and versatile platform that contributes significantly to the company’s operations.