<< Back to Summary 
If you were to use an online EMR such as HealthVault, would you be comfortable having Microsoft also be your financial practice management system vendor and send your claims to insurance companies?
#Response DateOther (please specify)
1.11/12/2007 7:52:00 PMDon't know
2.11/12/2007 8:57:00 PMirrelevant to me curently
3.11/14/2007 1:30:00 PMWould need to due diligence to see if it was a better system than we presently have.
4.11/14/2007 1:41:00 PMwe don&#180;t deal directly with insurance because it&#180;s public here
5.11/14/2007 3:00:00 PMI would not decide that - the hospital would
6.11/14/2007 5:00:00 PMNot sure
7.11/14/2007 5:19:00 PMbut we already have a very good one
8.11/14/2007 5:30:00 PMI don't control that aspect of the business
9.11/14/2007 7:48:00 PMno problem with microsoft, but refer to above answer for money considerations
10.11/14/2007 8:49:00 PMMicrosofts security systems are constantly being violated and one has to pay for technical help just to apply all the &quot;patches&quot; etc.
11.11/15/2007 1:37:00 AMWould have to have administrator evaluate that.
12.11/15/2007 11:45:00 PMn/a--i am an wmployee
13.11/16/2007 4:18:00 AMpossibly
14.11/19/2007 2:36:00 PMmaybe
15.11/19/2007 3:41:00 PMunsure
16.11/19/2007 7:01:00 PMdepends on the system and charges
17.11/19/2007 8:07:00 PMI am in a large academic medical practice. No need for Microsoft services.
18.11/19/2007 10:40:00 PMNo decision-making autonomy around current vnedor - contract recently entered into - very costly
19.11/20/2007 5:36:00 AMMore information needed. My present system works well!
20.11/20/2007 8:39:00 PMThis is a decision for our Business office.
21.11/22/2007 4:30:00 PMMICROSOFT is a trusted name and would serve everyone right
22.11/22/2007 4:55:00 PMnot yet - Microsoft has no track record n this area
23.11/22/2007 5:04:00 PMdepends on cost
24.11/22/2007 5:11:00 PMunknown
25.11/22/2007 5:39:00 PMno track record for this type of service, and microsoft custmer service is terrible
26.11/22/2007 5:44:00 PMn/a
27.11/22/2007 5:48:00 PMPossibly in the future, but for now, I am very happy with the system I have.
28.11/22/2007 5:55:00 PMconflict of interest
29.11/22/2007 6:01:00 PMAlready comfortable with our current system.
30.11/22/2007 6:14:00 PMI don't know
31.11/22/2007 6:37:00 PMNA
32.11/22/2007 7:21:00 PMdepends on the details, stark law issues etc.
33.11/22/2007 7:44:00 PMNeed more info
34.11/22/2007 8:01:00 PMIt would depend on a lot of factors
35.11/22/2007 8:17:00 PMsee #14
36.11/22/2007 8:40:00 PMIf Health Vault: a) Were THE source of community truth for my patient, had the entier Inpatiient and Ambulatory record, b) Were integrated to achieve inpatient and ambulatory scheduling. c) Had a robust Ordereing and Resulting capability as well as order/result tracking. d) Provided for patient communication documentation. e) Provided internal provider communication. f) captured charges and charge documentation ion the process of care. g) In specific be my cockpit or window to the world,Yes. But we've already got that, so why would I change?
37.11/22/2007 8:56:00 PMdo not know enough about system
38.11/22/2007 9:19:00 PMdon't deal with insurance claims
39.11/22/2007 9:27:00 PMmaybe
40.11/22/2007 9:36:00 PMunsure; I am concerned about them developing a monopoly
41.11/22/2007 11:09:00 PMabsolutely not!
42.11/22/2007 11:22:00 PMmaybe
43.11/23/2007 12:06:00 AMdepends on financial arrangements
44.11/23/2007 12:08:00 AMnot sure yet
45.11/23/2007 12:29:00 AMI'd need more information.
46.11/23/2007 12:49:00 AMIt would depend on the issues raised before around security and ulterior motives. A lot more information would be needed partcularly about the control of such a system especially in light of the violations of basic rights that have been occuring since 9/11
47.11/23/2007 1:15:00 AMpossiby
48.11/23/2007 1:16:00 AMI would have to weigh the cost and time involved in the transition, as well as the pros and cons of changing vendors
49.11/23/2007 1:20:00 AMprobably not, I am not aware of their experience in processing medical claims
50.11/23/2007 1:48:00 AMunsure--my company handles the billing
51.11/23/2007 1:48:00 AMNot sure--would need more info
52.11/23/2007 2:15:00 AMfew such claims as we are Canadian!!
53.11/23/2007 3:40:00 AMHowever, my hospital system never outsources these things.
54.11/23/2007 3:42:00 AMI am happy with the one I have
55.11/23/2007 4:18:00 AMperhpas
56.11/23/2007 4:53:00 AMNot sure
57.11/23/2007 1:16:00 PMMaybe
58.11/23/2007 1:29:00 PMmore information is needed
59.11/23/2007 2:11:00 PMMuch bigger question, don't know. (Not a current Q/A for me right now.)
60.11/23/2007 2:15:00 PMsee #16
61.11/23/2007 2:20:00 PMit depends; the details would be neededc
62.11/23/2007 2:24:00 PMNot sure.
63.11/23/2007 2:39:00 PMI am not aware that Microsoft has expertise in this area
64.11/23/2007 3:31:00 PMMICROSOFT HAS DEMONSTRATED ITSELF TO BE UNRELIABLE
65.11/23/2007 3:43:00 PMmaybe
66.11/23/2007 3:57:00 PMMicrosoft has not primary interest in whether I get paid.
67.11/23/2007 4:27:00 PMnot sure
68.11/23/2007 5:01:00 PMNot sure, need more information
69.11/23/2007 6:00:00 PMNo
70.11/23/2007 6:59:00 PMPossibly; again, would need more information about the whole structure and agreement, and accountability, etc.
71.11/23/2007 7:24:00 PMI would consider it
72.11/23/2007 7:30:00 PMProbably. Need experience and satisfaction before a total commitment.
73.11/23/2007 8:41:00 PMif it were cost wise
74.11/23/2007 9:19:00 PMUNCERTAIN
75.11/24/2007 12:39:00 AMAgain, not my decision, but it raise questions of self-referral &amp; conflict of interest; and doesn't feel right.
76.11/24/2007 6:58:00 AMAT A MINIMUM COST AND UNIVERAL ACCEPTANCE WITH RAPID TURN AROUND.
77.11/24/2007 1:51:00 PMhowever, my large urban hospital employer would not
78.11/24/2007 3:29:00 PMdon't know, need more info, and some control
79.11/24/2007 3:35:00 PMOh my God ! You have got to be kidding me. Another layer of unreachable persons with time consuming phone trees, etc. etc. etc. ---- NO. I want someone who has my best interest in mind, not theirs.
80.11/24/2007 5:51:00 PMDepends on healthcare system agreeing. Right now we have a very good billing system.
81.11/24/2007 7:12:00 PMI do not know
82.11/24/2007 10:34:00 PMNot applicable. I work for a large univeristy medical center, and I do not make those decisions.
83.11/24/2007 11:48:00 PMnot applicable
84.11/25/2007 1:37:00 AMPossibly---It would be make sense but I would first have to have the confidence that this &quot;package&quot; is the best one for my practice.
85.11/25/2007 1:55:00 AMAt this point we have invested a good deal of money in Centricity software
86.11/25/2007 3:57:00 AMPossibly--it would depend on how secure those records and financial information would be. I would have to be convinced of the privacy and security of all patient records and financial practice information.
87.11/25/2007 3:02:00 PMnot sure at this point.
88.11/25/2007 4:33:00 PMmay not be applicable in Canada
89.11/26/2007 1:14:00 AMUnsure ramifications
90.11/26/2007 4:17:00 AMpotnetial conflicts of interest
91.11/26/2007 5:27:00 AMwould have to know more
92.11/26/2007 11:04:00 AMnot applicable
93.11/26/2007 2:47:00 PMDepends on what they would offer.
94.11/26/2007 3:09:00 PMI'd have to learn much more about it; they have no experience in this field
95.11/26/2007 5:16:00 PMPossibly, the &quot;devil&quot; is in the details.
96.11/26/2007 5:38:00 PMN/A - academic practice
97.11/26/2007 11:55:00 PMAgain, I work for a University and do not make those decisins, but I would support that decision if it did not cost more than we now pay.
98.11/27/2007 1:16:00 AMmaybe
99.11/27/2007 2:40:00 AMpossibly
100.11/27/2007 8:20:00 PMDON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE SYSTEM
101.11/28/2007 9:02:00 PMnot comfortable with Microsoft having this much influence/access to this scope of patients health care
102.11/29/2007 9:17:00 PMSee #14
103.11/30/2007 12:13:00 AMsingle payor systems would be preferred