We are a multi-specialty group that had been using iO Practiceware for almost three years. I was initially apprehensive, mainly because of stories I had heard of much decreased productivity after adopting EMRs. I have been thrilled to find that the opposite is true. In fact, by the third day after implementation, I was able to see a full load of patients with only a thirty minute lag. However, I do believe this success is entirely system-dependent. I ran into a physician that had used iO Practiceware in our office and then moved out of state to a practice that used another EMR (one which claims to have the highest number of installations in ophthalmology). He was extremely frustrated because after six months, it was still taking him twice as long to enter patient data. The drop down menus he was using in his EMR were very cumbersome. iO Practiceware, on the other hand, uses a touchscreen system which is lightning quick and simple to use. At this point, I feel it would be most instructive to list the attributes of iO Practiceware that make it so efficient to use: 1. The system is well thought-out and organized. There is an alert button which allows important "notes to self" to be placed on a separate screen. For example, I use a treat and extend protocol on exudative macular degeneration patients. I have a note in this section indicating the current treatment interval for a given patient. This alert screen can be accessed with a push of a button from any other screen. This precludes the need to flip back to previous visits to find a note indicating a patient's treatment interval. 2. There is a highlights screen which is very well organized. It lists the previous procedures and surgeries done on a patient. The previous retinal drawing is also shown. From this screen, a chronological list of previous visions and pressures can be accessed by touching the current vision or pressure on that screen. The font size used on this screen is very large so that information can be seen at a glance from even 5 feet away. 3. A separate interpretation and report for testing such as OCT or FA can be accessed at any time. Also op notes for lasers can be accessed at any time. 4. Referral letters are easy to generate and an updated list of physician phone numbers are in the system. The letters are sent by a simple push of a button. 5. The system is easily customizable. A computer savvy person can add treatment templates in a matter of minutes without having to hire an expensive programmer. 6. The monthly maintenance agreement cost was very reasonable when compared to other systems we looked at. 7. Service is very personalized in that we are usually able to work with the same person on an ongoing basis. 8. Information is stored on an on-site server rather than in the cloud. This has many advantages in terms of speed of information access. There is virtually no lag when images are retrieved. 9. Documentation of patient information is extremely thorough. All bases are covered. In fact, a practice consultant that does practice self-audits remarked that this was the best system she had encountered so far in terms of documentation. In summary we have been very happy with iO Practiceware. It has increased my efficiency by 10 to 15 percent over paper charts. Also, documentation is a hundred percent better than patient charts.

iO Practiceware: why I love the system overall

Pros

First of all, I must preface my comments by the fact that I am a solo practitioner, Retina practice only, seeing roughly 30 to 40 patient encounters a day. In an attempt to be objective about the various offer, I separate software itself from connectivity issues, as well as the overall frustrations with the need for EMR, PQRS, and MU governmental regulations, which already cast negative cloud over the entire EMR implementation process. What enticed me about this product was the touchscreen interface, in addition to endorsement by a large retina group we know. We also decided to go for a cloud-based EMR rather than in-office servers. Most importantly, we prepared for implementation for three months prior to the same, per the recommendations of iO. I believe that if your implementation is rushed with any EMR system, there will be issues that will be difficult to resolve instantaneously. Having said this, from the time of implementation, it took us only several weeks before I was up to my regular patient load without a scribe! After synchronizing our billing department and its processes with iO, billing has been more efficient than pre-EMR; payments have been faster as well. Of note, we implemented in September 2014 before the last-minute rush; we had started preparing from July 2014 for implementation. Although we started with templates from another practice, which were quite comprehensive, I've been able to tailor the templates myself over the last several months, which makes patient assessment/plan summaries more efficient.

Cons

There are a good number of steps needed from seeing the patients to check out. If I look at this objectively, however, most of these have to do with PQRS/PQR I and MU requirements. I'm able to make this more efficient by rearranging the button/templates, which can be done quite easily. Initially, support had been sparse. Recently, I am able to speak with an individual, as is my office staff, in a reasonably efficient manner. There have been issues with dropped connectivity on occasion. We are troubleshooting the same with iO; however, we are cloud-based, and I am here in the Midwest. This does not appear to be as much of issue with the software, as it is with cloud-based connectivity; nevertheless, I would choose cloud-based over server-based in an office any time, as updates are done overnight. The company is constantly updating their software. The company does respond to requests regarding software updates/modifications, and the speed of this is improving.

Poor product, poor vendor, poor experience

Pros

The only thing I like is the product's speed.

Cons

The support, attitude, and quality of the vendor are all inadequate, as is the quality of the product.

I am a both a retina and uveitis specialist; I work in 3 different practices. After experiencing a significant patient volume drop, an increase in wasted time, and complete inefficiency with the EyeMD EHR software that one of the practices I worked for purchased, I was in complete disappointing about the whole idea of EMR. In the 2011 ASRS meeting, I noticed the IO Practice Ware vendor, after a brief demonstration I was almost in tears of emotion as I saw the beauty, ease and efficiency of this system. I decided to choose IO for my other 2 practices and I will tell you why I love it so much!!! The first thing you notice is that it is touch screen, this makes the brain get accustomed to it fast, besides the design is very logical and follows your thought; like the iPhone of EMRs for ophthalmology. The second best thing is that every piece of exam information is on a single screen; you do not have to browse through 20 tabs to find back what the IOP is. The third thing is that it handles images in the PDF format; this is extremely important. Most imaging devices can print, so IO takes a Print to PDF file and uses it as your image file. This makes the program go ultra-fast. The best part of all, you see the images in a second screen while you read in the exam window (like a radiologist). You can open multiple images at once and browse through the PDF image files with extreme speed and ease. No need to wait until anything downloads through the server. I will also mention that E-prescribing with IO is too easy, takes really just a fraction of what it takes to write a prescription with pen and pad (you can technically write a prescription in 3 seconds or less with IO). After a year of using IO I must say, my patient notes are 300% better documented. My referral letters are all on time and take almost no time to create. I am seeing more patients than before IO (this EHR is extremely fast), and my revenue per patient is up as I can now code with confidence, support the codes with multiple diagnoses (chosen by me), the system reminds you when to use modifiers. Their customer support is lovely, they will customize each screen any way I want it to make me even faster. They will solve most problems almost immediately. In summary, I would recommend this software to any retina surgeon or uveitis specialist who is concerned about losing speed or seeing less patients when transitioning to EHR. I love the fact that I use IO, I am very happy for the choice I made. I feel that I have purchased a superior product.

We have been very happy with iO Practiceware

We are a multi-specialty group that had been using iO Practiceware for almost 3 years. I was initially apprehensive, mainly because of stories I had heard of decreased productivity after adopting EMRs. I have been thrilled to find that the opposite is true. I do believe this success is entirely system-dependent. I ran into a physician that had used iO Practiceware in our office & then moved out of state to a practice that used another EMR (one which claims to have the highest number of installations in ophthalmology). He was extremely frustrated because after six months, it was still taking him twice as long to enter patient data. The drop down menus in his EMR were very cumbersome. iO Practiceware uses a touchscreen system which is lightning quick & simple to use. I feel it would be most instructive to list the attributes of iO Practiceware that make it so efficient to use: -The system is well thought-out & organized. There is an alert button which allows important "notes to self" to be placed on a separate screen. For example, I use a treat & extend protocol on exudative macular degeneration patients. I have a note in this section indicating the current treatment interval for a given patient. This alert screen can be accessed with a push of a button from any other screen. -The highlights screen is very well organized. It lists the patient's previous procedures & surgeries. The previous retinal drawing is also shown. From this screen, a chronological list of previous visions & pressures can be accessed by touching the current vision or pressure on that screen. The font size is very large so that information can be seen at a glance from even 5 feet away. -A separate interpretation & report for testing such as OCT or FA & op notes for lasers can be accessed at any time. -Referral letters are easy to generate. They are sent by a simple push of a button. -The system is easily customizable. A computer savvy person can add treatment templates in a matter of minutes. -The monthly maintenance cost is very reasonable compared to other systems. -Service is very personalized. We are usually able to work with the same person on an ongoing basis. -Documentation of patient information is extremely thorough. In fact, a practice consultant who does practice audits remarked that this was the best system she had encountered so far in terms of documentation.