When shopping for new or different software programs, the experiences of others can be your most reliable source. It is often one of the most influential sources as well, especially when that source shares many similarities, such as industry, operational structure, governmental regulations, etc. Ortivus would like to provide an editorial, so-to-speak, directly from one customer to another, without any Ortivus input. The only thing we have added is what you see in brackets to help clarify an acronym or clarify something that is referenced. We hope this commentary about the Sweet-Billing program helps provide trusted information that can be of value to many services when shopping the potentially confusing market of EMS software.
Hi Caroline,
Well let’s see what I can do to help you with this list. First of all we are not interfacing with our PD [police department] or County CAD [computer aided dispatch]. So, there go the first few questions.
On the billing side, we use Ortivus - or SweetSoft as most of us know them; would not use anything else. Their billing system is excellent and straight forward. If you go with Ortivus get the onsite training...and even extend the trainer’s stay. There is an incredible amount of short cuts and streamlining that only comes into play once you start using it. It will conform to most of your current workflow patterns and many things can be customized onsite. The billing software is tab and function key based so data entry and use is very fast - once you learn the system.
Question 5 - We chose to switch from Healthware Solutions to Ortivus [Sweet] Field Data specifically based on the interface between the two. Uploading data is a matter of the field medic choosing upload from the main menu and clicking connect...that’s about it.
What we really like about the interface is that it not only uploads the calls, but will update a local database with patient demographics from billing. The medics, when entering a call, will perform a simple search base on SSN# or Name or whatever and if we have transported the patient before or even if they were a guarantor for another patient - all they have to do is select to use that patient and then they just confirm current address, etc.... The billing information (address, phone, etc.) is already there. The field medics love this feature and billing doesn't get multiple accounts for the same person.
Questions 6. and 7. The program is simple, there is very little training required on the field data side. It flows like their current run form and is fill in the blank. There are not a lot of hidden screens and "magic" buttons that you have to push to fill out the run form. We are using toughbooks with touch screens and the medics do wish it had more push button short cuts for data entry of procedures and vitals rather than typing the numbers - but they also request a transcription service so they can just phone in their reports and someone else will do the work.... they are not getting that either.
Question 8. The trauma run sheet works fine and if the medics do their job then there is little for the office to do - other than run the report and upload it to the state.
Question 9. The Cons are very few. The system will not let you upload an incomplete call to finish on another machine or at another location. There have been a few times that would have been nice. We would like to see the QA/QI more interactive. You can pull data all day long and with a little practice you can generate just about any report you could imagine. They have a lot of canned standard reports to work off of and a flexible report generator that mimics Crystal Reports "lite" for those squirrelly reports.
Big PRO* - We have been on the current Amazon [Sweet] program since June 2002 and with the exception of the one hour once a year for new releases the system has been up and running 100% 24/7. Now being the IT professional also, I cannot find enough wood to knock on after that statement. This holds true for the billing and field data side. P.S. - We use Dell servers with MS SQL 2000 on Advanced Server 2000.
Question 10. The admin Staff at this time would not change from Ortivus unless support cost became too great or the program changed and became unusable.
Question 11. As stated above - Our choice to use Ortivus [Sweet] Field Data was based on already using Ortivus for billing. We dropped Healthware Solutions for the interface value. There are many field data collection packages out there but we have found unless they flow seamless from the field to billing AND back - someone will have to spend time to fix the blanks and errors. That is a recurring cost and waste of time that we are not willing to commit to.
If we ever change one, we will change both. We will not use a mixed system again if possible.
Just an FYI. We operate seven trucks 24/7 with a total call volume around 8,000 per year. The EMS director thumbs thru the calls in the morning and checks for missing calls, etc. and the rest of the billing is done by one billing person in a 40 hour work week. She also answers the phones, statements, appeals, etc.
I hope this helps you. If you have any other questions please contact me.
John R. Moseley
San Marcos/Hays County E.M.S.
San Marcos, TX
|
