GE Healthcare

Centricity Practice Solution

4 / 5 139 reviews


Average Ratings

139 Reviews
  • 4 / 5
    Overall
  • 3.5 / 5
    Ease of Use
  • 3.5 / 5
    Customer Service

Product Details

  • Starting Price
    Not provided by vendor
  • Deployment
    Installed - Windows
  • Training
    Documentation
    Webinars
  • Support
    Online

Vendor Details

  • GE Healthcare
  • www.gehealthcare.com

About Centricity Practice Solution

Includes EMR and practice management modules that may be used independently. Provides scheduling, denial management, financial dashboard, and more.


Spotlight_media_placeholder

Centricity Practice Solution Features

  • Claims Management
  • E-Prescribing
  • EMR / EHR
  • HIPAA Compliant
  • Insurance Eligibility Verification
  • Inventory Management
  • Multi-Office
  • Multi-Physician
  • Patient Billing
  • Patient Portal
  • Patient Records
  • Patient Registration
  • Patient Scheduling
  • Physician Scheduling

Centricity Practice Solution Reviews Recently Reviewed!


Long time user

Nov 14, 2016
3/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support
2 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 7.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: We have been using the product from the days it wasn't owned by GE - it was Medicalogic. When we purchased the original product - you got all features in one price - if you choose not to use that was your choice. Once it was purchased by GE it shifted to a base product plus - so if you want the plus (and you need the plus to meet meaningful use) you will pay for it in initial license fees plus additional support fees. Although we have met meaningful use - the level of day to day satisfaction by our end users is not what it was years ago, part due to the meaningful use requirements (not GE's fault) but part to system being slower - one with more keystrokes required and other you need fast hardware to help keep it responsive. You will need to add some 3rd party apps now for what in our opinion in today's world should be part of the core software. Things such as appointment reminders, portal, secure messaging, and scanning documents are examples where you need to buy 3rd party software - some supported through GE - some not. When we compare GE to our local hospital's system GE is designed for physician practice and GE is a better product. In my estimation meaningful use consumed lots of GE resources and it would be nice to see them catch up on overall functionality of the products.

Pros: Overall system is intuitive to the end user. Its use of some 3rd party applications blend in well with the product and end user most times will not know that a 3rd party application is being used. Customer Support is usually very quick and competent. Our interfaces with labs have been very reliable. Interfaces with the hospital software has been very reliable from GE's perspective - when we have had issues they are created from the hospital side of the interface. We have used the system 16 years now and it is core part to our patient flow and information flow and overall up time has been very good, when we have had up time issues it has been something on our side not GE's.

Cons: Each time there is a new function added to the program, that in my opinion should be a base function, there is usually a cost associated with it both with software license cost, added software support cost, and additional hardware resources. It appears to us the most recent new features involves 3rd party software that then also requires additional hardware resources (virtual servcers) and set up. If there is a bug in the system you have to wait for the next patch to come out to fix it, we as an end user have to figure out the work around of those bugs - there is no proactive communication of "known issues and the work arounds". For a small office training through GE is expensive. In the days of webinars and youtube videos which provides convenient training that can be accessed at any time - to get training through GE it will be an add on to your purchase price. Even voluntary training classes are held in regional sites across the country with a pricetag associated with those. I expect that a technology company would understand the up to date training is essential for optimal use of its product and optimal satisfaction and would use technology to meet those goals and not try to use training as a revenue producer. If there is free training they haven't made us aware of it. GE's rollout of their new Northstar product required travel to regional locations with end user having a cost of time and travel. For a technology company to use old methods to roll out new technology is disappointing.

Recommendations to other buyers: Over the years our operations as a clinic we have been successful with Medicalogic and GE over the years. As mentioned above when we compare to our local hospital's software GE looks very very good. Do a comparative with other products - be sure that when watching their demos that they identify all "potential add ons" you may need to purchase to make it work like they demo it (this is true of other products as well as GE)

Antiquated, poorly implemented, poorly thought out enterprise EHR

Mar 27, 2015
2/5
Overall
1 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
1.5 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 1.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: EMR allows access to medical records remotely; works with larger practices/academic practices; works with GE's scheduling software; the basic functionality is there, including integration with pharmacies, multiple outside laboratories, and radiology centers. This is the kind of EHR that has all the capabilities you would need for a large practice or academic center. Sadly, it is antiquated, poorly implemented, and very difficult to use on a day-to-day basis

Cons: We are still running Centricity 9.8, so some of the criticisms may not apply to the 10.0 product. There is so much wrong here that I cannot possibly list everything. Suffice it to say, it is surprising to me that anyone could sell this kind of software in the modern era. No other business but medicine would even consider it. I used Epicare 7 years ago; it was by no means perfect, but it was far, far more user-friendly than the Centricity of today. This is a system that has all the capabilities you would need in an enterprise EHR for a large practice or academic medical center, but fails miserably when it comes to usability and efficiency. It fails to the point that I am surprised that anyone would be able to successfully market such a terrible product in 2015: 1. Clunky, antiquated, mid-1990s era software in both look and feel. If you have a hankering to drift back to the halcyon days of Netscape 1.0, this one's for you. If you want something that feels like modern software and actually plays well with Windows 7 and beyond, look elsewhere. 2. Slow server speeds. Nothing else is slow on the computer, just Centricity. IT tells me it's the Centricity server. Quite frankly, I don't care why it's slow. I'm a user. I have a busy clinic. I just want the program to be snappy. Given Centricity's persistence in producing mid-1990s code, this thing should hum like a Ferrari. They replaced our 7-year-old computers in the clinic recently. Our web browsing speed is now lightning fast. Microsoft Office now pops up much faster. Ah, but Centricity - still plodding at the same slow pace. 3. Cannot open multiple windows (Hello! Microsoft solved this problem for consumers with Windows 3.1 in 1992). This is unconscionable in 2015. Who writes software like this anymore? 4. Home screens are fixed and not user configurable. I have more control over my Yahoo! home page than I have with my Centricity home page (and I don't have to pay anything for the Yahoo! home page). 4. Font size in Centricity 9.8 is still fixed at 8 point and does not expand when you expand the window. 13" laptop, 24" terminal, IMAX Theater - the font size is still the same size. This would be great if teenagers were working on the EMR, but for those of us approaching middle age, it means investing in a pair of reading glasses or finally getting those progressive lenses. Once again, low-level stuff that makes a program easy to used, again ignored. 5. No real-time spell check. Really. I cannot say how ridiculous this is, when my web browser can spell check as I type. 6. Poorly organized/Poorly implemented: -->There are buttons on buttons and checkboxes on checkboxes. This software looks pieced together since GE bought out Logician, and instead of ever rethinking, they just added a dizzying array of more and more stuff -->Tiny, tiny boxes to type history and other information into that cannot expand -->2000 character limit within the boxes (hard to believe that this is even an issue in 2015) leads to the need for multiple tabs for histories and character limits for the assessment/plan means very terse language, as there's no way to expand this. This is probably okay for most surgical practices, but for the complex, medical patient this is a death knell for this software. -->The Centricity programmers like to make you type text into boxes. Apparently, the smaller the box is, the better. The largest windows can be found on the supplementary tabs for the HPI. The rest are small, smaller, and smallest, without regard to what you might have to/want to type. -->Flow is unacceptably horrible when typing in notes: you have to type section by section within the tombstone, slab window that pops up. The window is 8" x 8 3/4 inches, and just like the font is not resizable. (No need to invest in a large monitor; the slab and its text never change in size.) What's even better is that depending on the tab, the tombstone is cut up into even smaller sections, filled with more tabs, rows of buttons, a variety of check boxes, and often very tiny windows that you could type into, that is, assuming you can see them. In most cases, you cannot write directly within the flowing text of the note. You must flip section-by-section within the tombstone to input any information (e.g. HPI, PMH, FH/SH etc.); there's no way to open a second window or split the screen to refer back to another part of the note. (Earth to Centricity programmers: why do you force us to type within a small window? How about flowing text with no character limits and resizable fonts that can be broken up into sections that are potentially collapsible with a click. Just saying.) -->The user can't customize their own flow sheets, notes, letters, etc. All this has to go through IT. There is no way to make a temporary, personal, customizable flow sheet on the fly either. Most EHRs allow this. -->'Quick Text' allows you to make customizable text shortcuts. Of course, you can't do this on the fly, while writing a note (which is when I think of these things in the first place). Of course, the quick texts have a character limit of 512 (ugh!), and you have to type into a box the size of a postage stamp, where you can't even view the entire Quick Text if it exceeds 40 characters. -->You cannot look at the labs and type your assessment and plan at the same time. This is a deal breaker for any specialty that relies on laboratory data when making clinical decisions. To view the lab data, you have to close the type-in tombstone window, click open the flow sheet or documents section. If in the document section, you must click on the document to view, then close it, click back to the update section, click on the part of the chart you want to go to. If you are viewing problems, you can click on the problem you desire to work on, but it always defaults to the screen for problem #1 and #2 so if you're working on problem #3 or beyond, it's yet another click. It takes at minimum of 4-5 clicks per reference back to a lab and 6-7 clicks if you are looking at a study, depending on which number problem you are working on. I end up opening and closing the note tombstone so many times during note writing it's almost seizure inducing. -->Scanned documents store as PDFs and the proprietary viewer is slow to pop up and makes it difficult to scroll through the PDFs quickly. This module is poorly implemented -->The printed notes are unchangeable and unformattable. They come chock full of plenty of useless fodder that make the note unengaging when read on the screen and often several pages long when one or two would do. And there's much, much more. I just don't have the time.

Recommendations to other buyers: Centricity is one of the few EHR solutions that can accommodate large, academic practices. The powers that be here chose Centricity because it didn't require much money up front. But, in many senses, you get what you pay for and don't forget that you still have to pay ongoing fees for the product. Centricity has the sell-the-handle-at-a-low-price-and-make-money-on-the-razor-blades approach to marketing. But buying an inadequate and clunky EHR is penny wise and pound foolish. Look for ease of usability. Demo the software, hands on, extensively. Make sure that the software fits all of your needs for connectivity, billing, and reporting, but realize that it absolutely has to be usable and work smoothly in the clinic. Otherwise, it will slow your clinicians down. As to GE, they really need to work with clinicians to smooth out the interface on product. The guts of the product are fine, but the implementation is so staggeringly horrific, you feel as though you are fighting with the program to produce a note. Not recommended.

Oct 03, 2013
2/5
Overall
1 / 5
Ease of Use
1 / 5
Features & Functionality
2 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: I am a family physician in a nine-physician group who had been a happy user of the older interface since 2005. All of my partners are in agreement that CPS 11 is worse than our previous non-CPS Centricity software. I am pretty tech savvy and had numerous Dragon Voice Recognition and Speechmike button macros. The new CPS interface which we have been using for several weeks now is near garbage and not well thought out in my opinion. The following are a few of the main issues I noticed: It crashes on my laptop (fastest available <1 yr ago) at least 2-3 times per day. I do not believe CPS was designed with providers in mind - certainly not high volume providers. It seems that many of the positive comments on here are from administrators. One of them even adds a caveat about providers issues. In CPS, an office note opens in a separate window. Thus, some other pop up such as a prescription can get hidden behind it. Worse yet, to view Flowsheets, Medications, Problem Lists, Allergies, etc., you must go to the Chart window (not the same as the Update or Note window). If the Note window is maximized, you must first minimize it in order to see the buttons. If the Note window is not maximized such that you can see the above buttons, you wind up with sliders on top of sliders. Sliders make the interface less user-friendly. The execution is rather poor. The append window allows text beyond the lateral bounds of the window; thus you must scroll side to side with a slider to see all the text. This is a time waster and a pain. When viewing a med list, etc., the window gradually expands to full size. Providers do not care about fancy graphics. If we click a button we just want to get to the information we need. I understand that those things may sell the product, but you should provide the user a way to turn it off once they get to the point where they want to be productive rather than watch the show. Providers do not want change. We develop a workflow and learn where things are. We remain more productive when things are not moved around the screen with every revision so we have to play hide and seek again. It also messes up the macros of advanced users. Dragon Voice Recognition is now about as slow as my typing. That is slow. Even text from advanced scripting macros is just as slow. On the medication tab, selecting between "Active Only" or "All Items" requires a drop-down menu. Thus I have to click for the menu, move the mouse to the choice, and then click again. These extra clicks are unnecessary and slow down the user experience. There are only 2 choices. If we are clicking it, we want the other one. Make it either a one click affair with a toggle button or 2 separate buttons for each of the choices. There was plenty of room for them to do this, but they did not. If you are on an older Centricity and have not used CPS yet, you probably will not get the full appreciation of how bad it is until you do. Some frustration is expected from any change where things have been moved around. It was worse than that with this revision. If you have never been on an EMR, you may never know how bad this is because you will not have a comparison. Unfortunately, I suspect if you are on Centricity you will be forced into it or another EMR. The benefits of changing to CPS are few, far between, and completely overshadowed by the shortcomings in the opinion of this tech savvy provider.

Jul 17, 2013
4/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are a healthcenter controlled network, who support seven different Community Health Center organizations in the states of Iowa and Nebraska with GE Centricity, CPS 10. We have been fully implemented with all seven organizations for the past two years. We support these centers with hosting services, support services, continuing education training services, and reporting services. Implementation of the system was fairly straight forward. We planned for 3-4 months to implement the PM portion of CPS, and 5-7 months to implement the EMR portion of CPS per center. The extended time for implementation and training was a huge success and 100% successful at each site (no retraining or non-use of CPS after implementation). My advice is take the extra time implementing to guarantee success the first time. We spent much time focusing on workflows and workflow re-engineering, multiple training classes, and assigning clinical champions for each department or area. Ease of use: CPS 10 is fairly straight forward to use once you understand the workflows and steps. My biggest complaint from our users is the large number of clicks to complete a task. It is hard to explain why it would take up to 25 clicks to complete a prescription refill if the medication was not correct or needed to be updated. Expect to do a lot of clicking and typing, which is generally typical for most EHR systems at this stage. Product Quality: CPS 10 is generally a solid program that gets the daily functions done correctly with minimal issues or inconsistencies. With that said, our biggest frustration are error messages that occur on a frequent basis with no work around or quick fix. We generally must wait till the next release of the application is available before they are repaired. It is hard to explain to a provider they must live with an error message occuring 2-5 times a day for the next 3 months until a fix is developed. Software breaks and has issues, but the lack of assistance to fix irritating errors quickly can cause frustration. Overall, the application functions as advertised. Customer Support: Customer support can be hit or miss. We generally get a callback on issues between 2-5 days on most GE tickets opened. We generally have to work through tier support to get to the right person. Since we also support the application, we usually waste a week working to the higher tier support techs since most of our issues we have already troubleshot ourselves. Support will eventually get back to you, but it might not be quickly. We generally have to nudge our sales manager to push tickets through that do not get responses. Overall, you will get a response eventually. Functionality: The program functions well and as advertised. It has all the bells and whistles and does everything up to compliance. This is probably GE's strongest area, keeping up with compliancy and functionality. I would recommended GE Centricity to another user, as no EHR is perfect, but expect the above performance items and support mentioned.

Jul 16, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We're an 18-site independent primary care group that has been using Centricity for almost 10 years, after dumping another enterprise EHR that failed to get off of the launchpad. We had a phenomenal project manager leading the implementation of our first offices, and we were able to pick up the baton and implement the remaining practices using a stepwise, train-the-trainer approach. We currently use CPS 11. The product isn't perfect, but we've worked with other products peripherally, and none are better for a group our size. Despite "clunkiness" in earlier versions, we've seen the product steadily improve over the last few years into a solid, dependable solution for our patients. Clinical content possibilities are nearly endless which can be a good thing and a bad thing (don't caught in the customization quicksand!). Functionality has improved to get simple tasks within physician "click thresholds". We have used the system for research studies, care management, patient-centered medical home, and a variety of P4P/Quality programs - and I would say it has helped us improve clinical outcomes. GE keeps an open door for users to submit complaints, comments, and suggestions; and the Centricity user group is second to none. We might see an occasional glitch from time to time - as is expected with any IT system - but it rarely impacts clinical care. Support has improved dramatically over time, and we typically experience quick responses to our issues, particularly if the system is down (we also have a backup environment to mitigate production outages). Overall, we have been very happy with our decision to implement Centricity, and we would highly recommend it to anyone looking for a new EHR. Ratings: Ease-of-use: Overall, very good. There are some things removed from the latest version of CPS (11) that we would like to see back in place, but we have adjusted through customization of our forms. Product quality: Very good. The user interface is a big change if you're used to the older versions, but over time, users say it's intuitive. We still see the occasional error, glitch or crash, but we usually upgrade to new versions soon after they're released. The quality is far better than earlier versions. Performance is good if you have the right infrastructure in place. Functionality: Outstanding. It has a wide range of content out-of-the-box, the user group shares content freely, and customers can create and modify any forms they wish to put into practice. It meets ICD-10 needs a year early, and it has been easy to meet Meaningful Use requirements. Customer Support: Very Good. It has improved tenfold over the years. Response is fast, and, generally, resolutions are sufficient to fix issues. Updates to fix bugs could come a little faster.

Aug 20, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: Heart & Vascular Center of Arizona is a 9 physician, 8 mid-level, 6 location cardiology practice in Arizona. We went live on CPS 2006 for PM and then EMR in 2008. Our implementation went very well and we have continued to grow with the product. We are using two lab interfaces, CCC Forms, Docutrak, Patient Portal and Kryptiq Secure Messaging, Online Bill Pay and E-Statements, e-Prescribing, Biscom Fax, Cardiosoft EKG Module with integration into our office note, Real Time Eligibility, Centricity EDI, Analytics and InDXLogic automated indexing. After going live we saw an immediate savings of nearly $100,000 per year in transcription costs that were no longer necessary. We had been scanning older documents for years and were totally chart free within 30-60 days! Our providers and medical assistants use wireless laptops in all of our office locations. We have one outreach location where our doctors flies his plane to and connects via Citrix. Our Patient Portal has continued to improve our efficiency as we grow the participating patient population. Releasing medical records, online bill pay, decreasing phone time and the cost of staff produce measurable ROI for our practice. We have upgraded several times and were one of the first GE Practices to attest to Stage I Meaningful Use for CMS in April 2011. We are currently on 10.1.3 and planning to upgrade to 12. We are utilizing MQIC reporting for PQRS for our providers. We have also successfully integrated our Centricity reporting with the American College of Cardiology and the Pinnacle Registry for reporting. The Centricity/MQIC Quality reporting is providing us all our data for our NCQA Heart Stroke Certification. Our clinical staff frequently pull inquiries for all types of quality initiatives and the ease of obtaining this data is remarkable! The Billing System far surpassed anything we had previously utilized. The real time insurance eligibility piece is used by both our front office and billing departments, and we could not live without it! The integration between the EMR and Charge module is awesome. One of our favorite billing features is the EOB for secondary, which is immediately available after the payment is posted. The other major upgrade for us is Centricity Reporting and the Analytics Program. Both very powerful tools that our practice cannot do without! Centricity Support Staff have guided us through implementation of PM and EMR and two major upgrades. I cannot say enough about the personnel that GE provides for us. We jumped into the world of EMR in 2008 and have never looked back, always forward towards new technology and the next upgrade!

One bug after another

Jul 15, 2018
1/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support
1 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 2.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: EVERY time we upgrade versions there is a new issue that crops up. EVERY. TIME. This latest , to version 13.2 of CPS completely broke our practice management components ability to do reports using the Analytics feature, which frankly was the best feature of the EMR or PM side. Now it does not work and has not for almost 6 months. We just a few months ago got a email from GE acknowledging that they recognize this actually is a known issue with the newest version of the SQL database server. Apparently they had no idea it wouldnt work with the newst version and we were literally the first in the ocuntry to find that out. Add to that GE just sold them to a private equity firm, so who knows what the future holds. We have been on Centricity for a long time (over 6 years) and it has been very consistent. Consistently letting me down.

Pros: WHEN It works, it can do a lot and is very customizable with various 3rd party form design software

Cons: It is so freaking buggy. my colleagues are always complaining to me about it. I am a doctor and every month at our board I get to listen to all my practice partners complain about the latest weird GE bug.

Jul 26, 2013
3/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: Our organization is unique for Centricity because we have 4 practices that are their own businesses and friendly competitors, but we are all associated under one umbrella; collectively owning an optical, lab, and ASC. We do share the patient's registration and chart with the rest of the practices in our building. This means many work arounds to ensure the sanctity of the office's fees, schedules, etc. The system's canned way of doing things often does not work for us. We have to set protocols and have to massage the system to have it work in our environment. All of that being said, I have had a good experience with this system. It has many valuable assets for the type of work we do. We are currently on version 10. We converted to Centricity Practice Management in November of 2005, in preparation of converting to CPS EMR that following year in February 2006. Our old operating system would have been about to speak with EMR systems, but there were too many limitations since the two systems were not one in the same as Centricity is. I do believe implementation went very well for the end user. The system was very user friendly for our front office, scheduling, etc. The billing portion is not as efficient and easy as our last DOS based system IDX. In fact, the billing system is not efficient in the way our unique organization has to use it. That being said, it is "date of service ticket" based and we have had to use work arounds to get the collection and payment modules to work for us; where the DOS based system worked the entire account at one time and we did not have to work individual tickets as we do now, to keep each of our company's separated. I find support to be not helpful when they finally do get back to you. They do not take the time to really listen to the issue I am calling about, and it takes several calls to get something resolved or to get the answer that there is nothing they can do. The billing modules were suppose to be fixed in CPS 10 to not freeze as often. I have found since our upgrade to CPS 10 the billing screen is slower and freezes more than it did in version 9.5. Version 10 has removed many features for the problem list, clinical lists, and navigation that were essential to efficiency, that were present in CPS 9.5. I am holding out hope that version 11 will reinstate some for these things.

Jul 17, 2013
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are a 160 provider multi-specialty group. We've been on Centricity EMR since 1998 and on Centricty PM since 2005. The product fits our needs. It is very stable and functionality improves with each release. We are currently on EMR version 9.5 and CPS version 10 with a plan to combine the two products at the next software release. GE Support used to be a weak link, but has improved significantly over the past 3 years. We get good incident responses and appropriate escalations for business-impacting issues. The product is fairly easy to use and training for new users is quick. We have a fairly complex and fluid environment so this is very important to us. We do get complaints from providers about "too many clicks" but we can usually come up with an acceptable solution by changing either the form they are using or the provider workflow. Some of this "click-count" is related to Meaningful Use requirements that are not really a software problem. The product does require some trained, knowledgeable "super-users" who can help translate provider and clinic needs into a workflow that integrates with the software. We have a dedicated account manager who works with us on product roadmaps, enhancement requests, and regulatory requirements. GE has made executive-level staff available to discuss strategy and planning. They treat us as a partner rather than a revenue stream. They do make a genuine effort to connect with their customers. One comment I have is that integration with third-party GE Partners (such as patient portal vendors) can be confusing. Sometimes it seems as if the partner products are tacked-on rather than fully integrated solutions. One other comment is that the development process for new releases and features seems slow. Sometimes features that we want immediately have to wait for the next software release. It would be nice to have a platform that was more extensible. In general though Centricity is a stable, usable platform, and a key component of our business. We used it to successfully meet the Meaningful Use requirements for our doctors. We have surveyed competing products just to get a sense of what is out there and we found that none of them are perfect. Centricity isn't perfect either but it has been a solid performer for us over a long period of time.

EMR for an internal medicine practice

Feb 24, 2017
1/5
Overall
1 / 5
Ease of Use
1 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support
1 / 5
Value for Money

Comments: We have had this for more than 4 years. Since the start, it became clear that it had Major, major flaws. GE implied that they were going to fix in the upgrades, but to this date nothing!. They have obvious bugs--where the program asks for a choice, but either choice results in the dame thing. The diagnoses come down from a multiple choice menu, but in some, after you have chosen and migrated to a different screen, it states that it is an un-coded diagnosis. I don't understand why it would be listed in the choices. Pharmacy choices are ridiculous. It will default to out of state pharmacies--simply starting alphabetically. After selecting a new pharmacy, the program defaults to the one you have just replaced. There is no end. The programmer must have had fun adding unneeded mouse clicks. For example, in renewing a prescription, there are 5 more clicks to do before finalizing it. Clicks that do not offer a choice. Basically, just repeating OK, OK,OK, reviewed, OK.

Pros: I can't think of anything that a different program does not do better.

Cons: I don't have time for this.

Jul 16, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are an orthopaedic practice that has been on GE Centricity Practice Solutions (CPS) the practice management since 2001. We have been very successful using the practice management (PM), and knew when it was time to look at the EMR, GE would be the right choice. Having a fully integrated EMR/PM system is (in my opinion) the best way to go. We are pleased with the way GE handled the ICD-10 implementation. The system displays both the ICD-9 next to ICD-10. When ICD-10 goes into effect we will have office notes that match our billing. CPS is capable of sending ICD-9 to some insurance companies, and as the insurance companies are ready we will send ICD-10. The system has been designed to handle both. In January of 2013, we went live with CPS 10.1.3 EMR, we feel that this has been great decision. Our processes and systems continue to improve over time. CPS allows the physician to code by selecting the problem. Our orders are fully integrated and flow into the PM side. Documentation is clean and our notes read like an office note. The physicians can dictate, use a template, or do both. We have found our physicians like using the template for the history, ROS, and physical exams but would rather dictate their assessments using Dragon Medical software. We have an HL7 interface with the hospital. This allows labs (in structured data format) and hospital reports to come into the system without us having to work the document. Our patient portal allows us to capture the histories which flow into the record and decreases staff time needed for data capture. We went live, and for two weeks did half schedules. We went back up to full schedules with much better documentation, and meeting the meaningful use standards and criteria. We were only able to accomplish this with our GE EMR trainer and project team. With any EMR - my strongest suggestion would be to take the time for proper set up and training. GE gives you the tools and the people to allow for smooth implementation to EMR. GE CPS is a flexible system which allows you to develop the processes you need for your practice. That does not mean it's an easy system but I do not believe you could have an EMR that would be flexible and meet your needs without it being complex.

Three years into using PM and EHR

Jan 23, 2015
1/5
Overall
1.5 / 5
Ease of Use
1.5 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 1.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: The front desk applications seems to work reasonably well.

Cons: The reporting is horrible. After three years, I am still finding reports that don't balance and don't report on the data correctly. A major system like Centricity should have reports that are correct all the time. The users should not have to have a fear that the reports are correct. The only reports I trust for accuracy are the CPA reports in the value added reports. Any report related to patient counts, visits, demographics, and other patient data can not be trusted to be accurate. We use a VAR, and it sometimes takes them months to get back with the reason why some reports don't balance. One I found last month is a canned report used in MU reporting; they still have not corrected the report nor told me why the report is incorrect. Getting any special report for my use is a nightmare, and I have in fact given up trying anymore. The VAR responsible for our training at the beginning was totally ill-prepared to train us and, in fact, had to eat well over $25k in training time because they wasted our time and didn't do the job. Since then, they have improved a bit but not to the point where they are good.

Recommendations to other buyers: Before signing on the dotted line, get into the actual details of what the system provides. Insist that they load a demo database for your use and then take some time to work in the demo database. If they tell you they can't do that until you sign an agreement, go to another program. Make sure the docs in your group are part of the users who experiment with the demo database. Be aware that while the forms in Centricity may be many, they are not very useful. Find out the cost to develop your own forms.

A Gold Price for an Aluminum Product

Aug 04, 2018
3/5
Overall
2 / 5
Ease of Use
2 / 5
Features & Functionality
2 / 5
Customer Support
1 / 5
Value for Money

Pros: I started using Millbrook Paradigm and then GE bought it and changed it to Centricity Practice Solution. Most everything one could think of being in a EHR is present and the software has been around for many years.

Cons: GE has a cost for every little thing that is done or added to the software and it is VERY expensive and time-consuming to have in one's office. There are many glitches, freezes, and other problems that never stop happening. I had this software in usage for over ten years and wish I had quit using it a long time ago.

Overall: There are many other software options available that work better and cost much less. I would not recommend this software to anyone.

Many resources

Apr 30, 2018
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
4 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 8.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: From what I understand GE Healthcare EMR will be bought out by another company. I'm hoping that this will help fund change.

Pros: I have found that GE offers a lot of education at your fingertips. You just need to sign up for a SSO user login and there you can find different resources to help you use the product. You can tailor your own forms within the program with the use of a different software.

Cons: There are too many add-ons that can become pricey. There are many 3rd party vendors that you can use within centricity for additional cost. That can be frustrating. I would prefer to pay additional money monthly for a one stop shopping program.

Very happy -- we have been on CPS PM since 2000, added EMR in 2012

Mar 03, 2016
5/5
Overall
3.5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 10.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Centricity Practice Solutions (CPS) is flexable and we can create forms and use them how we need. ICD 10 advance search is easy to use. The office note reads like a office note and not EHR junk. We have decreased FTE in medical records, and front rooming staff with the interfaces to teh hospital and intake forms. We have multiple interfaces and don't have issues with them We work in a Citrix enviromet and can sign on from anywhere. Our AR is excellent.

Cons: The product is flexable so that means it is complicated. This is not a out of box product you need to develop your work flow. We are Ortho pedatric so no program would be out of the boxow tell our readers what you don't like about the software and the vendor.You have to plan and understand the product, complaints I read sounds like they have not learned the system.

Recommendations to other buyers: You will need to change your work flow no matter what system you buy. After we have been on this system 6 months we were seeing more patients and doing much better documentation. You get what you put it -- probably like that on all EHR systems.

Sep 16, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are primary care clinic that purchased the EMR in 1999 when it was Medicalogic with a go live date in 2000. GE purchased Medicalogic sometime around 2004/2005. The core basis of how the EMR works is the same as the original product, but it did undergo a major renovation in CPS version 10 to a new look and some changes in how the user inputs information. Overall the product has grown over time with each update, and they've added some features and capabilities with each upgrade. We purchased the original system based on the ability to use it as a tool where part of the patient documentation is a by-product of using the tool (e.g. writing prescriptions, placing orders, updating or reviewing the problem list, etc). We can attest that still is mostly true to this day. The key to our successful implementation was identifying necessary interface points (eg labs, hospital transcription, imaging reports, EKGs, etc) so that the EMR received timely information automatically without having to be keyed in or scanned. Second was developing workflows around the electronic delivery of information, not reliant upon the paper trail. Third, we spend time training everyone and testing before go live. Overall customer support for GE has been very good. With their efforts to meet meaningful use, we have run into some nagging bugs in some recent releases, but all major issues are handled timely. The product has always been intuitive. I would have easily given five stars had they not transitioned to new look with CPS10 - but in GE's defense that is a government Meaningful Use transition. Also would easily be a five star if GE would just include some the of their add-on features within its base product. There are some items essential for ideal functionality that you have to purchase and add on to the base product. Overall the product has enhanced our clinic's efficiency and continues to meet our needs.

Jul 16, 2013
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are 6 Physicians, with six different locations of care, in the same superficiality. We have used GE CPS, and we have also used the GE support for the last five or more years. We want a stable product with solid support for problems and upgrades, etc. We feel the best thing we did was go with GE. No software is going to do everything for one type of practice, but this product has done lot of things for helping us live with the changing expectations of the government and the public. We have a nice patient portal, we met the meaningful use very easily, and sending/receiving the reports into CPS has been very nice. The entry of information and navigating the software is very easy. We could go on. The secure messaging, the prescription handling, the verification of medication benefit coverage, and there's lots more. I have to mention the readiness for ICD 10, of which we are there already. All of the staff is familiar with it. We are using CPS 11 version which is a combined billing and EMR. We have volunteered to be an early adopter for GE and that made training the employees unnecessary, since they were already familiar with the product. We have gone through the evolution of different versions of CPS, starting just the PM when they were Oracle based, then went to combined product with CPS version 9, 10, and later 11. The system is robust, easy to use, and has solved lot of our problems - all while being very cost effective for us. We know some folks think it is like consumer software, just take it out of the box, install it, and that's all they have to do. It is not true; just like any software, the organization has to spend time and effort to make it work. GE can and does make it turn key if they are given the choice. We did the upgrade from 9 to 10 and from 10 to 11, and opted for GE to do a turn key upgrade.

Disappointed so far.

Jun 07, 2015
2/5
Overall
1.5 / 5
Ease of Use
1 / 5
Features & Functionality
2 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 2.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Works well with Centricity Practice management.

Cons: I applaud the effort and time spent by the reviewer Jonathan from Rutgers RWJMS. However, I really doubt that GE will be able to address these and other essential concerns that are constantly brought up by providers. I actually saved these comments as I share all of these concerns and more and would like to monitor if anything improves in the next 3-5 years. GE Centricity engineers don't seem to be able or willing to make this product user friendly. It is inconceivable to me that although I am in charge of signing the checks to pay for EHR (for huge upfront license costs and significant monthly support fees) I am not able to demand a better quality of this product in terms of workflow efficiency, intuitiveness and customization. I would not go with this EHR as it is exactly the opposite of what another user stated below - "extremely flexible".

Recommendations to other buyers: GE Centricity may satisfy your basic EHR and practice management needs.

Unsatisfactory

Nov 26, 2013
1/5
Overall
1.5 / 5
Ease of Use
1.5 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 1.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Administration is pretty simple when it works.

Cons: Basically everything. It's completely user-unfriendly, unintuitive, and overly complicated for seemingly no reason. It appears to have been designed by an engineer with absolutely no input from any physicians or nurses. We have to restart the software several times a day because it just shuts down or freezes up. We have found technical support to be lacking. We've called in and sat on hold for an unreasonable amount of time. When we finally got someone on the line, they told us that they couldn't help us with our problem but that someone would call us within 24 hours. Days went by before anyone returned our call, and even then it was only to ask us one or two questions and then open a ticket. We waited another week or more, only to get a vague e-mail about how they couldn't fix the problem or that they knew exactly what the problem is but that it will require a new release of the software to be installed. When we asked when that release would be available, they said they didn't know. This song and dance happened on a fairly regular basis, as we found numerous glitches and issue. Updates and new versions appear to be rushed and have often added new issues while not fixing any of the old issues. All in all, I have found it to be a very frustrating experience that has taken away from our clinic's efficiency and patient/provider relationships.

Recommendations to other buyers: I wouldn't bother with CPS - or GE software in general.

Jul 22, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are a County Health Department that has six Federally Qualified Health Center funded clinics, a community attending Specialty Clinics, and a Family Practice Residency program. We began our transition to an EMR about four years ago with the selection of GE Centricity. The adoption of EMR technology was a requirement for continued ACGME accreditation as well as a HRSA mandate. Prior to purchasing Centricity, we used a legacy hospital billing system, which provided only limited practice management features; all charting was manual and distributed to each clinic site. We initially implemented GE CPS 2006 in the summer of 2009 and have since migrated to CPS 10.1 in a virtual/thin client environment. Due to budget realities over the past few years as well as severe internal resource constraints, we have not fully implemented all the functionality of the Chart module, though we will be able to attest for stage one meaningful use in early 2014. Via GE and their open architecture, we are able to leverage various ancillary technologies such as e-prescribing, patient portal/secure messaging, bi-directional interfaces to reference labs/HIE/Immunization Registry, as well as SQL queries for financial analysis. The Chart module in CPS 10 is intuitive for clinicians to adopt, and all medication, phone notes, problems, and orders are all fully being managed in the EMR at this point. One of the best aspects of our partnership with GE is customer support and they are truly world class in this area. Due to the elements in the EMR we have adopted to this point, we have increased our HEDIS and HRSA clinical performance measures and believe we are now well primed to transition to full provider point of care use of the Chart module and look toward a paperless office.

Jul 29, 2013
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We chose Centricity practice management and electronic health record (EHR) for a variety of reasons, and remained very pleased; we did so over 7 years ago. Currently, we are on the CPS 10 version. The platform for the EHR was one of the main reasons we chose Centricity. The software is highly customizable in a user-friendly way compared to other systems. It offers certification for meaningful use, and we have now successfully attested. We appreciate the many features in Centricity that make our working lives easier. We have gone from a 20-step surgery scheduling process, to one of 10-steps. Having reduced transposition and data entry errors is invaluable to a busy practice; we've designed surgery related forms to flow forward to ASC documents, to ensure the highest level of accuracy possible. In addition, being able to send billing orders to the practice management side of the system, while seeing patients, has eliminated data entry and facilitated more auditing before claims go out. Our technicians and physicians would never go back from this system to paper. Our clinical efficiency has risen steadily with Centricity. We have reduced our call backs immensely with patient instructions, pharmacy prescriptions, and insurance authorizations. In addition, the work flows for all clinical activities, from one patient chart, available to everyone - so much more efficient. Doctor to doctor correspondence goes out much more quickly through the system. Patients appreciate their Clinical Visit Summaries in their hands as they leave to reinforce their care plans. The system is intuitive and easy to train. The physicians have access to patient information remotely which has changed their on-call lives as well.

Centricity has saved us time and effort in our Billing Department and Daily Posting.

Nov 13, 2017
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
4 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 8.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Centricity has been the easiest transition to a software I've had. With as many interfaces as we have with other systems, Centricity was able to accept all of them and help us keep our staff highly functional and kept up with all of our daily responsibilities.

Cons: The reporting from within Centricity lacks the customizable reporting we were used to with our previous software.

Overall: Centricity has helped me get through our daily inventory with payments and deposits faster than ever before. The ease to which we can post and work our checks and denials has given us more time to focus and work on projects within our department.

GE Centricity PACS

Dec 12, 2017
3/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support
4 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 7.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: I use a different GE Products and I would have to say that their GE Centricity Line of software especially their pacs system works great. I use it daily being the PACS Admin for the site. The staff use it daily and compated to others it is simple to use

Cons: There is a lot of work that could be done to help out Radiologist and Technologist. Missing features that they would love to have like Auto verify.

High cost, low flexibility

Nov 09, 2017
2/5
Overall
2 / 5
Ease of Use
2 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support
1 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 1.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: May be a good system for a very large practice but it is far too costly and inefficient for small specialty practice

Pros: Good integration with billing software THere is nothing else good to say .................................

Cons: High cost Forms cannot be manipulated or changed without spending additional money Some basic reports are available but any specific information desired by a specialty practice cost money to formulate

Used for 10 years but time to move on

Jun 04, 2018
3/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support
3 / 5
Value for Money

Pros: Allowed for easy access to schedule and ease of use when opening up and navigating patient's charts.

Cons: While this software served our office for approximately 10 years, when looking at competitors we had to let it go. The biggest gripe that our office has it that when wanting to have a representative come in to pitch their updated product, they were a no show. Not great customer service!

From Developers Point of View

Apr 04, 2018
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
2 / 5
Customer Support
4 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 8.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: I design the best forms in the entire Centricity Community, www.ehs-corp.com

Pros: The product certainly has a robust feature set by allowing 3rd party developers to design forms/content With proper knowledge of form building, Centricity offers the HIGHEST level of customization

Cons: Sometimes slow for end users Customer service could be better User interface sometimes get in the way

Very easy to learn

May 21, 2018
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
Likelihood to Recommend: 9.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Ease of use, staff who are not tech savvy had a very easy time learning the basics and in just a month were into the more sophisticated functions

Cons: Pricey - but based on its functionality, is worth it. The upfront costs were higher than anticipated. The support is a little strange that for a small practice, you are limited to one or 2 vendors.

Simple program with simple features.

Jul 11, 2017
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
5 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 8.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: Overall it is a great program. I would say it would be best for a smaller practice.

Pros: It is basic and easy to use. Once you learn the systems it is very easy to navigate. Posting on claims and accounts are VERY easy to do.

Cons: It may be too basic for a company looking for more high-tech features. It does not have all the flash bells and whistles of other newer systems.

Every Product has its Pros and Cons

May 04, 2016
5/5
Overall
4.5 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
4.5 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 8.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: They are on top of updates to comply with regulations. They have many features that you will probably never use, but hopefully, will have lots that will be useful to your situation.

Cons: It is a large company (parent company is GE), so they will never be able to accommodate any special situation for you. If they don't already have what you want, it is not likely that you will get the feature you want unless you happen to fall into the majority. They also require you to go through a reseller, so you never talk to GE, which also has it's good and bad points.

Recommendations to other buyers: Just make sure that the features you are looking for in your software are included in this product or it is a feature that you can live without. Don't expect that something you want will ever be accommodated. They don't take special requests.

Frustrating product to use

May 21, 2016
1/5
Overall
1.5 / 5
Ease of Use
1 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 1.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Fairly easy to use, though cumbersome. Several issues--see below.

Cons: Very slow movement between screens, cannot open multiple windows at a time, quick text cannot be used throughout the entire product, vendor doesn't fix problems quickly. Several months can pass before issues are addressed. Currently having problems with the screen minimizing often while typing and locking up with phone notes. Medication interactions are not up to date and some are seriously ridiculous such as a warning against using Bactrim for women??? Too many buttons to push in order to send prescriptions. The prescription refill page is VERY slow.

Recommendations to other buyers: Not recommended. Our company has been using it for several years and we have had ongoing problems especially when doing updates.

Sep 11, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We have been using Centricity (formerly Logician) for 14 years. The product was chosen for its ease of use, but primarily for its scalability and ability to be customized. Our provider numbers and fields of practice are relatively small/low, but we do have an incredible amount of data utilized for research purposes. GE's EMR is an enterprise level database and is very capable of storing all of the data we collect and research. We are currently on the Oracle version of the EMR (version 9.2), and are fortunate in that we do not require the use of a practice management system. We utilize Kryptiq Secure Messaging, as well as the Kryptiq Patient portal for a population of patients who may or may not be associated with one of our clinics. In terms of ease of use, obviously there is a learning curve when transitioning from paper to electronic documentation. With the form building software that is used with the EMR, you can customize the forms to facilitate point and click documentation, as well as automated order entry and problem/medication list updates. I have had nothing but positive experiences with customer support as well as engineering support. Our implementations and upgrade experiences have also been very positive. They work with you at every step of the implementation process, and the support continues beyond the implementation. All EMR's have their pros and cons, but for all of the qualities listed in this review, I would highly recommend this medical record software without hesitation.

Adds Work but not revenue

Dec 16, 2015
2/5
Overall
1.5 / 5
Ease of Use
2.5 / 5
Features & Functionality
Likelihood to Recommend: 4.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: The software works with Citrix to allow use outside the clinic. It complies with MU. The colors don't give me a headache. Allows for user created to get around the strange workflow.

Cons: 1-5 second lag between screens. When multiplied by the screens per encounter (5) and by the average number of patients (25), you add an extra 2-10 minutes to each day just waiting for the program to get you to the right place. It will take a year to feel comfortable enough with the product to get back to the same patient volume. Very difficult to change configuration for anything without asking your IT department.

Recommendations to other buyers: Reconsider implementing EMR if your organization is large enough to consider this software and cannot use something on a cloud model or cannot afford the upfront costs of faster systems. This software doesn't really guide your visit to promote patient safety and will cost you time.

Jul 18, 2013
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are a 58 provider, family medicine residency program, with 16 faculty and 42 residents. The clinic has about 50,000 visits per year from approximately 20,000 unique patients. We have been on GE Centricity EMR since March 1998 and the GE Centricity Practice Management system since November 2005. Overall, we still find GE Centricity to be a top of class system with great flexibility and functionality. Our goal when looking for a system years ago was to be an advanced, technologically saavy clinic providing the highest quality of care to patients through use of tools that physicians, other clinicians, and staff could easily adapt to and use. There is a concept in the Internet world of "don't make me think" which gets to the heart of system ease of use. If someone has to "work" to determine how a function operates or what is meant by the name of a field, they they are having to put too much effort in "thinking and interpreting" data and systems. Although, as with most systems, opportunities exist to keep the intuitive nature of the system at the forefront, GE's product has done well to serve the clinic. Centricity EMR has allowed the clinic to track and trend patient outcomes to improve delivery of care to patients. Because we are a continuity site training residents, we have been able to expose many to the value EMRs bring. The clinic has also achieved NCQA DRP x2, NCQA PCMH level 3 status x2 and many other recognitions resulting for care provided by use of the systems.

Very flexible and customizable; full-featured EMR and Practice Management

Dec 14, 2016
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
5 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 10.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: We have been live on Centricity Practice Solution at our pediatric practice since 2007 and were on Millbrook Paradigm practice management software (which became the practice management component of CPS) for years prior to that. The system is very powerful and has met the needs of our pediatric practice and allowed us to become NCQA Level 3 certified as a patient-centered medical home.

Pros: Integrated scheduling, billing, EMR. We have also integrated check-in with Phreesia, reminder calls with CallPointe, provider-ordered electronic lab ordering with labs returning into our system with Liason EMR-Link, and have a workflow to use CHADIS with our patients. Additionally, we use secure messaging and patient portal and have integrated with our state's immunization registry. The ability to modify forms to fit with changing practice needs is extremely useful.

Cons: Would be nice to have a smartphone-based interface.

Recommendations to other buyers: Our practice has been very pleased with this system and I heartily recommend it.

Centricty

Oct 16, 2017
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support
3 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 7.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Easy to navigate through all areas. Great scheduling and billing software. Easy to train staff on all functions.

Cons: Reports are not very robust. System slow at times when posting payments and reviewing unpaid claims for follow-up.

Capterra-loader

A true gem for a providers Solutions. Easy to learn and easier to use. Managing is smooth. Awesome

Jan 11, 2018
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
5 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 10.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: I've been using this software from last five months and I must say this is a well built software. I mean all solution all parts of medical billing is included in this software. You can easily prepare reports to track the Accounts cycles. Denial are easy to habdle. And patient information is easy to manage. Filing claim and follow up on time is easy. Interface is so easy that learning is kid's play.

Cons: Sometimes software loses connectivity. But if you have a good strength internet connection it is easy to avoid.

GE Centricity - Recent upgrade from CPS10 to CPS12

Jun 18, 2014
3/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
3.5 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 6.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: I like the system up time, the ability to customize content with the visual editor application, and the ability to run our own inquiry reports. It has all the bells and whistles to operate and meet Meaningful Use measures.

Cons: It's difficult to get engineering support with more difficult issues like random error messages, crashing, or bug problems. GE will either tell you to upgrade (which usually just replaces one set of bugs with another) or tell you it's a known issue and that there isn't a fix yet. This kills provider morale and faith in the system. Also, our users dislike all the add-on products and would prefer to have things like document management and interfacing built directly into the product as opposed to using a third party vendor. The seven different Community Health Centers we support have been on versions 9, 9.5, 10, and 12 over the last four years.

Recommendations to other buyers: Request a site visit to another clinic or two who are using the software to best understand the feel and usability of the product. Ask for multiple references to talk to in order to understand if your needs will be met by the application. Visit online websites and read reviews from other users.

Did a new EHR rollout over 7 practices with Centricity

Jun 08, 2017
4/5
Overall
1 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support
2 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 6.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: They need to streamline training and make the software a little more user friendly. There are too many decision trees and it can be confusing.

Pros: It is adaptable to any specialty and there is a forms customization that can be utilized which is very helpful.

Cons: It is not user friendly and requires extensive training which is difficult to do while you are still trying to give care.

Review of Centricity for Neurosurgery scheduling

Jun 15, 2017
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
3 / 5
Features & Functionality
Likelihood to Recommend: 6.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: The software was very easy to learn when I started using it. The scheduling was very user friendly and we are able to enter all of the info we need to see our patients.

Cons: The calendar feature was the only thing that I did not like. When switching from one month to the next you keep having to pull the calendar back up. It does not stay up.

Easy to use

Apr 12, 2017
5/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 7.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: Our entire Clinic loves this program and we will continue to use you

Pros: Easy to learn and teach people. Not hard to assign each user restrictions and our whole office uses it

Cons: It's hard to get a one-on-one with customer support and to do webinars takes too much time and they always ask for a specific time and working in a medical clinic it's hard to give

Aug 04, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: Our small clinic has been using Centricity since 2002. Back then it was called Logician. We did an extensive review of all EMRs available and attended a VHA conference in Dallas, TX about "best of breed" EMRs. Logician (Centricity) was voted best of breed and we were impressed with how intuitive it was. That conference made up our mind and we implemented shortly after that. We have never been disappointed since. What impressed us after the first year was the return on investment. We no longer needed transcription and that saved our small practice about $75,000 the first year. In addition, there was no need for certain employees to do jobs like chart pulls daily prior to starting, pulling the charts during the day for phone calls, etc. We went from 5 FTEs per provider down to 3.5 which saved a significant amount. However, the most important thing for us was how much easier it was to document visits and care for patients. Our ability to document the visits and code appropriately really improved our efficiency. As EMRs have evolved over the last several years, we have been very happy with how GE has kept up with Centricity. We are now able to obtain realtime data on patients visiting our clinic so that we can do chronic disease management. We were able to qualify for Meaningful Use I with Centricity for all our physicians. This EMR has helped us re-engineer our practice!

Sep 25, 2012
3/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
2 / 5
Features & Functionality
1 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: We are a small surgical practice based in the Boston, MA area (3 surgeons). We were essentially mandated to purchase an EMR system, and after some research and recommendations by colleagues, decided upon the GE Centricity system. We have have been online since 2008, and have found it to be a TREMENDOUS drain of money and time. To be sure, the problems may lie in our vendor support: we pay almost $1K a month simply to be able to call them (it is NOT a retainer), and they charge for EVERY SINGLE KEYSTROKE they make on our behalf. There is no monthly service maintenance fee that would cover general issues (these "issues' pop up constantly, even though we are now "in the Cloud"; our servers are simply used for storage). We are currently looking at an annual payout of around $30K for this system. It may not be much for a larger practice, but for ours, it's a big hit. Essentially, it is the price of an employee. We pay hundreds of dollars a week simply to stay online. Training was minimal, with virtually no followup (without paying out, of course), and it's gotten to the point where we are seriously considering throwing it all out for another system with another vendor. We cannot, in good conscience recommend this system. Perhaps if there was a local vendor who didn't make us feel like we were being completely hosed every day, we might not have the same opinion of this product. Thumbs down!

Centricy Practice Solutions 10 works great for us

Feb 03, 2014
5/5
Overall
4.5 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 10.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: I have been using Centricity PM (software) and HealthCo (vendor) for 10 years. (I am not using the EMR portion of the product). I feel the PM software is user-friendly and easy to learn.

Cons: I don't have anything that I least like, necessarily. There are times I wished my enhancement request could be done sooner.

Recommendations to other buyers: When I was initially testing PM software, I found that Centricity PM gave me everything I needed, and they were willing to listen to users' input for future modifications in the software. They tracked enhancement requests to see the demand for who else was needing that specific change, which enabled them to work on the "hottest" ones first. Also, when looking for a product, you want to make sure the reporting, balancing, month-end close, statements, and any other patient accounting is useful. Centricity met all those requirements for us as well by their "Value Pack" add-on. If you're looking to bridge the Centricity PM product with your existing EMR, that's also a possibility. I successfully did that with 2 different software products. I would highly recommend having a "super user" on staff that can be the point person for support calls and training. We also have access to the Knowledge Base for the common problems and fixes for them.

Long Time User

Nov 14, 2016
4/5
Overall
5 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 8.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: I have used this system for 15 years and am satisfied with it's performance. CPS is very user friendly for the staff. The physicians sometimes find it takes too many clicks to get where they want to be. There are so many add-ons that you can purchase to make this software do what you want it to do. We use a VAR for support and are pretty happy with that route as opposed to direct support from GE. CPS has the ability to do whatever you need it to do as long as you are willing to put the effort and money into it.

Pros: Easy to use for staff. Availability to add on so it does what you want.

Cons: Set up takes some time. Updates/Upgrades sometimes cause other issues that the system wasn't having prior to the update/upgrade. The system is not geared toward the ENT specialty so we have had to do a ton of work to get the content we need in the forms.

Recommendations to other buyers: Make sure you have someone who is very experienced in the IT department to help with form maintenance and to help work on the bugs.

CENTRICITY

Apr 12, 2017
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support
3 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 7.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: Love that you can run reports and 'banner' ge centricity with something like" all patients over 65 need to be asked for a polst" love the ability to run reports

Cons: scheduling was outsourced to medical manager as did not love centricity scheduling. blocking schedules was a mess when we first started

Absolutely terrible.

Aug 22, 2014
1/5
Overall
1 / 5
Ease of Use
1 / 5
Features & Functionality
1.5 / 5
Customer Support
Likelihood to Recommend: 1.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Pros: As the largest group practice using the GE Centricity software, we have had extensive input and access to development and support.

Cons: Although there are trade-offs to most EMRs, we had tweaked and tweaked Centricity over the years. Many back end solutions and custom templates had helped make the limitations of the product livable and stable. However, due to ICD-10, we were forced to upgrade to CPS 12. This new upgrade is worse than any EMR I've used. Average items on the doctors desktop have surged into the 100-200 range daily due to the unbelievable number of clicks required to accomplish even a simple task. The slowness of the software on any desktop at any location is unbearable. Frequent bugs and crashes are common. But even if these were temporary IT issues, the lack of forethought and workflow optimization is staggering for such a large company with a high-end product.

Recommendations to other buyers: Stay away if you can at all. Clearly, there are folks that identified many more issues than those I mention. I'd strongly consider reading the reviews only for CPS12 if you are evaluating this product.

Aug 20, 2013
5/5
Overall
3 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
5 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: ACHS is a Community Health Center with five rural health clinics and 20 clinicians providing integrated health and behavioral health services in northern New England. We have been on an EMR since 1996, following Logician through its acquisition by GE and transition into Centricity. Currently, we are on CPS version 9.8, and preparing for an upgrade to CPS11 in September. Overall, we have been very satisfied with Centricity. The product is intimidating to new providers, but the ability to customize forms and develop workflows that meet our providers needs is worth it. We also do a lot of custom reporting by leveraging crystal reports against the SQL database. This has provided our organization with an extremely robust and powerful tool which has facilitated our success as a Patient Centered Medical Home and more recently as member of a CMS Medicare ACO pilot participant. The GE staff are knowledgeable and bend over backwards to support us. I believe it is the level up support that we get from GE that sets Centricity apart. Despite the challenges of using an EMR, we recently absorbed a small one-doctor health center who had been practicing with paper charts for 25 years. We spent 3 months pre-loading charts, but she was back up to full speed within 3 months of go live.

Greatest Practice Management System - Ever

Mar 08, 2018
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
4 / 5
Customer Support
5 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 10.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: Definitely a 4.5 out of 5 stars in my book.

Pros: If you're in the market for a practice management system that can service small, medium and large size physician groups, look no further. GE Centricity covers every portion of the revenue cycle from scheduling to payment posting. In my opinion the two most relevant Pros are a) ease of use and b) data analytics.

Cons: I have only one critique on the system. The process for handling charge corrections is quite outdated.

Customizable

Dec 16, 2016
4/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
4 / 5
Features & Functionality
2 / 5
Customer Support
3 / 5
Value for Money
Likelihood to Recommend: 7.0/10 Not
Likely
Extremely
Likely

Comments: We have used GE Centricity for 11 years now. The biggest advantage has been the customizable templates which works well for individual practices and specialty practices. When we first signed on, GE staff helped with the customization, but since then one of our practitioners, who programs for a hobby, has been able to develop several new forms and adapted forms for our use. Customer service has been spotty at best, but the user's group has been very helpful. The stability of the platform has been variable lately. The Smart Search function for finding diagnoses and diagnosis codes has never been very helpful. The third party vendor for medication interactions does a very poor job, using outdated information that requires time-consuming added steps in prescribing.

Pros: Customizability

Cons: Diagnosis search, medication interactions

Recommendations to other buyers: If you like the idea of developing your own templates to match your workflow, this is the product for you.

Aug 03, 2013
5/5
Overall
4 / 5
Ease of Use
5 / 5
Features & Functionality
3 / 5
Customer Support

Comments: Ours is a 10 physician Family Practice with two mental health providers, a Gynecologist, a Physiatrist, an Endocrinologist, and an Orthopedic Surgeon all using Centricity for documentation 100% of the time. We use Docutrak, InDxLogic, Kryptiq Secure Messaging, CCC Forms, MQIC, and AthenaHealth (as our billing system). We have 35 Centricity interfaces with our in house labs, reference labs, billing, digital plain film imaging, Bone Density, EKGs, Spirometry, Holter Monitor, Hospital Connections, and PHQ9 Depression Screening. Our practice has had a Medical Home Certification for three years. Much of the documentation for our certification was simply a matter of demonstrating our use of Centricity functionality available "out of the box". We have been Centricity Users since 2005. We are currently on EMR 9.5 with plans to upgrade to CPS 12 when available. We will look forward to the improved user interface and functionality of CPS 12. As I imagine it is with all systems, it has taken years to learn to use the Centricity functionality and then modify the system to our needs. Customer support is spotty with several hurdles before reaching someone who can actually help with some of the tech support personnel better than others.