/  Technology Comparison

Simply looking at the surface of an EHR solution is like evaluating an iceberg—what you see above the surface is only a small percent of the whole: an EHR and PM total view inclusive of technology is important.

Trend is in the replacement of EMR solutions. Statics from the Coker group suggest that roughly 30% of current EMR implementations are replacing an older solution. It is also estimated that every five to seven years technological obsolescence drive change of Practice Management systems.

Transition is disruptive and costly; thereby making technology a paramount consideration. For this reason, iMedica PRM is built ground up on the latest technology to help ensure cost effective long-term value for the practice.

See more detail

iMEDICA'S TECHNOLOGY ADVANTAGE

	2 Databases/ 2 Applications	1 Database/ 2 Applications	1 Database/ 1 Application
Licensing	High cost: 4 licenses required	High cost: 3 licenses required	Low cost: 1 application, 1 database license
Training	High cost: 2 applications for physicians and support staff to learn Separate installation and set-up required, doubling installation cost and time Doubles database administration expenses	High cost: : 2 applications for physicians and support staff to learn Separate installation and set-up required for two applications, even though they access the same database	Low/moderate costt: Single application, one look and feel reduces training time One streamlined installation and set-up; simplified administration
Interfaces	Intensive effort: Likely interface problems between applications and databases; interfaces must be constantly managed for problems	Intensive effort: Even with a single database, there are many interfaces working between the two applications (PM/EMR)	No effort: No interfaces within the application.
Maintenance	Intensive and costly: Twice the maintenance costs on the applications, databases, servers, and operating systems Increased IT staff concerns: additional support fees, multiple contracts, multiple interface maintenance fees, frequently non-standard technology demanding IT staff training	Intensive and costly: Twice the maintenance costs on the applications, servers, and operating systems Increased IT staff concerns: additional support fees, multiple contracts, multiple interface maintenance fees, frequently non-standard technology demanding IT staff training	Minimal: IT staff manage one environment; most IT groups are already familiar with latest Microsoft technology
Datastores (data accessibility and usability)	Low: Data in one database or application typically not available to the other; data must be copied between databases to be shared	Low/Moderate: Data in one application typically not available to the other; data must be copied between databases to be shared	High: Total accessibility to clinical, financial, and demographic data in one application and one database, without interfaces or the need to copy or duplicate data
Security	Complex and risky: Security model is complex; PM and EMR security have different set-ups; complexity reduces data security	Complex and risky: Security model is complex; PM and EMR security have different set-ups; complexity reduces data security	Simplified/Highly Secure: Rights-driven data security; single set-up; simplicity increases security; use of the latest security protocols
Cost of Upgrades	High Risk: Vendors' shift in development plans forces costly migrations; operating system, server, and hardware required to support new releases; upgrades frequently break interfaces and create unplanned expenses	High Risk: Vendors' shift in development plans forces costly migrations; operating system, server, and hardware required to support new releases; upgrades frequently break interfaces and create unplanned expenses	Low Risk: Use of latest technology minimizes risk of OS upgrades; design ensures that program upgrades will not require reprogramming interfaces; practices can choose when to upgrade based on their own growth
Speed of Vendor Development	Slow: Most often on older coding languages with different coding frameworks demanding separate coding initiatives; must interface code sources between PM/EMR applications	Slow/Moderate: Most often on older coding languages with different coding frameworks demanding separate coding initiatives; must interface code sources between PM/EMR applications	Fast: Uses latest coding language for entire PM /EMR; easy to integrated new coding modules; most robust coding toolset available for rapid and accurate development

iMedica is committed to keeping current with the latest technology. As evidence, iMedica is changing every year by
keeping current with Microsoft — the innovators, such as going from .NET 1.0 to 3.0. iMedica will not have to layer on
code or partners to keep current, we are the technology leader. iMedica is investing, staying current and leading.