[AnythingPopup id="4"]

Does Free Always Come With A Heavy Price Tag ?  

Of late there has been a spate of attacks against perfectly free EMR, on grounds that such a product is actually not free; that the increased hours/money spent on getting trained in such an EMR offsets the benefits of free implementation.  Also, another popular line of attack is that such an EMR is not certified for meaningful use and may beat the purpose of installing them in the first place.  Finally, doubts are being cast on the revenue generation models of such a product, in that they may be selling out classified patient information to all and sundry.

But there are some who argue that nothing can be further from the truth.

A free EMR like Practice Fusion has been voted the No 1 EMR among primary care physicians for two years in a row (2011, 2012,) and obtained meaningful use certification from ONC-ATCB in 2011.

Insufficient Support ?

The accusation of extra hours being spent in getting trained in a free EMR, because the support services are inadequate, is an ungrounded myth. Free EMRs n are simple to learn and free of unnecessary frills. There are a few billing vendors who pay for or offer free practice management software. This leaves the doctor with a tight budget, a choice to adopt an EHR without losing sleep over costs.

Unfounded Criticism…

Although the attack about the revenue generation model is the weakest of them all, let us make things clear here.  Free EMRs generate revenue primarily by running ads of Pharma companies etc.  As additional revenue, even if mined data is shared with federal healthcare bodies, it is suitably masked.  But hey ! Isn’t inter-connectivity of all patient databases one of the goals of the EMR project?

We really think that in the future, it would be wiser if the critics of the free EMR model to do bit of homework before firing their salvos.