Electronic vs. Paper Charting ~ Which do you like better?

cannoli · Mar 30, 2005

We also "use" Meditech, and I hate it and have thought it to be the most user-unfriendly, stupid program I've ever seen; but since I haven't ever worked with any other electronic charting software I thought they were all like this one. Glad to hear that there are some good programs out there. I will never like this one, or think that it makes sense. I'm sure the hospital got a "good deal" on it.

Ditto!!!!!!!!!

SmilingBluEyes · Mar 30, 2005

meditech has made our work miserable. I wish we could get a program that works to save us time and actually is accurate. I cannot possibly detail here all the problems we are encountering w/it. It's a HUGE time waster, time I don't have to waste. I really do hate it. I would do paper over this any day.

Home Health Columnist / Guide · Mar 30, 2005

The corporate parent of health system I'm with is switching all facilities from Meditech to Invision this year.

Two years later after HBOC Pathway homecare software implimentation, computer novice RN's are still struggling doing OASIS + plans of care. Overall I love the system can find most info but has 6-9 month learning curve.

meownsmile, BSN, RN · Mar 30, 2005

After a few months of using computerized charting,, there are some good things and some bad things. Good-,, you can read it as opposed to someone's chicken scratching that is illegeble to everyone who sees it. Bad-, there are times when i cant find what i need to see was done/charted, have problems with things not being documented consistently in the same place (uhhhhggggg).

So i dont know,, if people could get things in the right places it might be good..Do we really need 15 screens to chart one assessment, paper charts only had 2 sheets. But until then,, it would be much easier to pull a paper chart from outside the door,, i still see that as more conducive to accurate charting, rather than going to find a computer ( not already in use) and sign in EVERY time you want to check something.

UnewmeB4 · Mar 30, 2005

We have had computerized charting for years. Still waiting for Docs to get on board. ESPECIALLY can't wait for the ordering to be done by computer.

As anything new, you have to be properly trained, get the bugs worked out, then appreciate it.

We have every system listed to do our q shift assessment. If the parameters are normal...one click, and that assessment is in. You also have choices to click abnormals that there might be, again, one click. I think people get into trouble whne they feel the need to TYPE the "typical things we use to, i.e. "AA&O X 3, MAE" etc. It is double charting. All you have to do is click..WNL.

The "bestest" part is, the H&P will pop up when a patient is readmitted, and all you have to do, is update. To me, this is the Most valuable tool.

The DRs can integrate their PDAs with it, and can obtain their labs, etc, from there. Of course, it will be your younger ones who do it. I saw one hold his up to the sync decise, and voila! His notes came out beautifully printed, and placed on the chart. Nowwwwwwww, if we could get tham ALL to do it!

If used properly, it is a dream, not a nightmare. As much as everyone complained when we went to it, you should hear the complaints when someone goes to another place that doesn't have it. We are funny creatures.

grimmy, RN · Apr 1, 2005

i've used a few types (3 total, i think) of electronic charting (ec) and i far prefer electronic charting to paper charting. i prefer to type instead of writing longhand, anyway. i've used perse (which is good), another (name i forget), and ormis, which is what i use now. i think that once you become proficient, most ec systems are fairly simple to use compared to paper charting. of course, ec documentation always becomes paper charting, so it creates its own back-up system.