The Cognitive Science Behind EMR Usability Checklists

Short Link: http://j.mp/6ahiad

Checklist: “A list used to ensure that no tasks are omitted, no important aspects are forgotten, and all key functions are checked”

Advantages of usability checklists include:

  • “practical”
  • “visible to clients and evaluators in terms of purpose”
  • “quick to administer”
  • “relatively comprehensive”
  • “flexible and undemanding in analysis”

I like checklists, especially for pilots and kickbikers. However, my perspective on EMR usability checklists, as someone who’s taken a few courses in human factors and cognitive science–is a bit skeptical. But, I’m even skeptical about my skepticism, so at least I’m willing to be convinced otherwise.

To understand my concerns you need to realize the degree to which usability engineering is applied cognitive science.

Cognitive Science is the Iceberg

Why do I bring up cognitive science? Because EMR usability checklists are just the tip of a cognitive-science-applied-to-EMRs iceberg. If all you know or care about is the part of the iceberg that is visible and above the water, well, you don’t understand the complete picture.

Let’s start with the part of the iceberg that’s beneath the waterline. On my shelf, from one of my courses, is the first edition of Cognitive Science: An Introduction. Published by MIT Press in 1987, its introductory description of cognitive science holds up well.

One of the most important intellectual developments of the past few decades has been the birth of an exciting new interdisciplinary field called cognitive science. Researchers in psychology, linguistics, computer science, philosophy, and neuroscience realized that they were asking many of the same questions about the nature of the human mind and that they had developed complementary and potentially synergistic methods of investigation. The word cognitive refers to perceiving and knowing. Thus, cognitive science is the science of mind. Cognitive scientists seek to understand perceiving, thinking, remembering, understanding language, learning, and other mental phenomena. Their research is remarkably diverse, ranging from observing children, through programming computers to do complex problems, to analyzing the nature of meaning.

Since the above description was written, anthropology has been admitted to the fold. While I haven’t taken any actual courses in it, I’ve followed anthropology’s contributions to cognitive science and medical informatics, including theories of distributed and team cognition. An aside: My interest in anthropology began when I read Spradley’s Participant Observation, published just before I started medical school. My intention was to keep a set of field notes about my experiences. Swamped, I shelved the project. However, it turned out that one of my anatomy lab mates was studying me! Segal, Daniel. 1988. “A Patient So Dead: American Medical Students and Their Cadavers.” Anthropological Quarterly 61:17-25. It happened again during my Intelligent Systems degree at Pitt. My interest remains piqued.

By the way, in a previous post I distinguished between traditional EMRs, based on declarative representations of medical knowledge and patient data, and EMR workflow systems in which procedural knowledge about workflows and processes is represented. The declarative/procedural distinction is a classic topic in cognitive science .

Usability is the Tip of the Iceberg

The most frequently cited definition of usability is from the International Organization for Standardization:

The extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.

In a three hour tutorial I used to give at TEPR (2004-2006), called EHR Workflow Management Systems: The Key to Usability, I would critique definitions of usability from “User friendly” to the ISO 9241 definition.

(One of these days I’m going to update and publish those slides. Stay tuned. $300 value–I believe that was what about what TEPR charged about a hundred folks to attend.)

usability3

I tweaked the ISO definition (am I in trouble?) to emphasize the relevance of EMR usability to the collaborative performance of teams of users.

usability2

The tweak–from

  • users-to-users,
  • goal-to-goals, and
  • environment-to-environments

–is due to my engineering background. It is the entire system of patients, parents, guardians, specialists, subspecialists, primary care physicians, physician assistants, nurses, staff, acute and subacute participants in all the workflows and processes of patient health that needs to be optimized. Even if EMR usability checklists work, with respect to a single user, goal, and environment, there is no guarantee that optimizing single user usability won’t in suboptimize higher level global system goals. So I prefer a definition of usability that emphasizes team, rather than individual, performance.

As soon as one begins to think about usability in terms of cognition distributed across teams of humans embedded in a EMR workflow matrix, what I call the “three multis” come to the fore:

  • multi-encounter,
  • multi-site, and
  • multi-specialty.

The three multis–spanning time, space, and specialty–are relevant to the pediatric medical home model, in a systems engineering sort of way. I mentioned the three multis in my 2003 white paper, “EMR Workflow Management: The Workflow of Workflow” (page 6), but I’ll more systematically highlight their relevance to the goals of the medical home model in a future post.

Why Am I Skeptical?

As I do appear to like usability, the topic, why am I skeptical about the use of checklists to measure EMR usability?

  1. Most checklists I have examined are not based on sophisticated notions of EMR workflow management. There is a deep and profound connection between workflow and usability (previous post: “Pediatric EMR Usability: Natural, Consistent, Relevant, Supportive, Flexible Workflow“). Since most EMRs are not workflow systems, the checklists I have seen don’t do this connection justice.
  2. If usability is relative to a specified user (such as pediatrician) and goal (managing a pediatric patient) in a particular environment (a real pediatric practice), how can someone–who is not the specified user (usability expert, not pediatrician), does not have the same specified goal (measuring usability, not managing a pediatric patient), and does not operate in the user’s particular environment (simulated, not real)–accurately estimate usability? There are ways around this, such as participant observation and other techniques to study cognition in the wild. But they do not lend themselves to checklists.
  3. Folks underestimate the long-term strategic cost of discouraging new, different, innovative, and improved EMR user interfaces, when they argue that current EMR user interfaces should be standardized to maximize positive transfer of learning between them. Recall the resistance from some DOS users to adopting the graphical operating systems from Apple and Microsoft? (By the way, the Xerox Star 8010 Dandelion, the first graphical user interface I used, predated the Apple Lisa by two years and Windows 1.0 by four years: Video 1. Video 2. Look familiar?). Usability checklists developed for DOS applications would have retarded, not encouraged, long-term OS UI usability. Let’s not make that mistake with EMRs.

Apply cognitive science to improve the human-computer interface; you get usability engineering. Apply usability engineering to improve the physician-EMR interface; you get EMR usability checklists (among other things). These checklists are the distilled residue of a tremendous amount of theoretical and experimental investigation. To adopt any of these checklists without understanding the cognitive science behind the usability, or the systems engineering behind the engineering, is to mistake the tip of the iceberg for what keeps it afloat.

Come to think about it, I’m not skeptical about EMR usability checklists, just their unskeptical use.

OK. That was me playing devil’s advocate.

So, convince me otherwise.

P.S. Here’s my weekend kickbike checklist (copied directly from my phone):

Edit
5:48 AM, April 1, 2007

Kickbike checklist
Binocs
Tea/water
Sun glasses
Metrocards
Food/dessrt
Books
Music/head phones
Chairs
Forks
Plastic bags
Paper towels
Toolkit
Nuts (for squirrels)
Check air
Towel
Bug spray
Camera
Extra shirts (if summer)
Sunday paper
Allen wrench for stems black tape on it
Silver multitool thingy
Two ball end wrench for lever on allen wrench
Air pump

An Untraditional Website for an Untraditional EMR

Short Link: http://j.mp/6nN0Pn

Folks ask why EMR workflow systems looks so different from traditional EMRs. I’m also asked why our product website looks so different from other EMR product websites. There is a connection.

The following Dilbert comic strip (circa 1999) was taped to my door for years (and must be around somewhere, because I would not have knowingly tossed it).

Dilbert.com

I’ll get back to the strip later.

The High-Usability EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Workflow System is designed to be used in the fast-paced, dynamic, and distracting environment of a pediatric office. Its large buttons, and ability of compensate for less than perfect environmental conditions, are based on the same usability design principles that make senior-friendly products senior-friendly and pilot-friendly cockpits pilot-friendly. The basic idea is “senior-friendly is everyone-friendly is pediatrician-friendly.”

My Top Ten Age-related Usability  Accessibility Guidelines

  1. Large buttons (“actual” EncounterPRO buttons) and underlined hyperlinks (retro!)
  2. No menus, shallow hierarchy
  3. Large san-serif font, extra space between lines
  4. Black on white and lots white space (most important material in foveal vision)
  5. Frequent emphasized headlines (chunked for skimming)
  6. Important phrases highlighted (again, for skimming)
  7. Glossary for technical terms
  8. Text-relevant illustrations (no generic clip art or photos, multimodal depth of processing issue)
  9. Omnipresent sitemap (such as a comprehensive navbar or fat footer)
  10. Redundant and intrapage navigation, backward and forward links (retro!)

You may disagree with some of these guidelines (and accessibility researchers often disagree among themselves). They’re just the ones that have made the most sense to me over the years. By the way, senior-friendly and child-friendly usability guidelines have a lot in common, but I’m going to reserve that material for a  future post.

Feel free to do your own research and weigh in.

www.google.com/search?q=web+accessibility+age+OR+senior+OR+older

Traditional EMR product websites do not typically follow these kinds of guidelines. Many websites are (allusion to comic strip ahead) some combination of Flash and html, or, even if there is no Flash present, they look “webbish” in that way: small form factor crammed with small font text, lots of menus, and generic medical illustrations (mostly happy medical professionals). And no fat footers or backward and forward links.

If you design for usability based on age-related accessibility guidelines, interestingly, the result is a bit retro. This is both understandable and not bad. After all, the DrudgeReport is, by some accounts, the best designed site on the web *and* looks like it’s caught in a mid-nineties time warp. One shouldn’t be surprised, since design principles should be timeless. They are a consequence of the structure and function, and therefore limitations, of our human body and cognitive systems. Part of the problem is that “webbishness” trumps good old-fashioned usability and accessibility.

Some of the following are a bit whimsical, but all contain at least a grain of truth:

My Top Ten Reasons for Designing A Senior-Friendly EMR Website

  1. Show that we know and care about EMR EHR usability and accessibility.
  2. Maximize length of time on website by making it easy on the eyes and obvious to navigate.
  3. Appeal to older pediatricians. Supposedly, older physicians are slower to adopt EMRs. Andrew Erikson posted this comment about traditional EMRs prompting physicians to retire. (Might the teensie-weensie little eye-straining checkboxes and radio buttons be part of the problem?) An EMR EHR workflow systems, with its simplified displays and order entry (made possible by a workflow engine executing process definitions) is ideal for the semi-retired physician who just wants a part-time practice.
  4. Seniors are the fastest growing web user demographic.
  5. Both sets of my, and my wife’s, parents are alive and clicking, and I’d like them to appreciate this work of great usefulness and beauty.
  6. I am the most frequent visitor to our website and *I* appreciate less eye strain, easy to recognize hyperlinks, and large targets to click.
  7. To make a point by being symbolically different and memorably distinctive.
  8. Generate interesting material for a blog post; after all, *you’re* reading this, right?
  9. More and more children have senior caretakers. Pediatric practices sometimes link to the website of their EMR vendor (example, lower right) to show they are using the latest technology to help their patients.
  10. Seniors like to print websites. I do too. The pages print well.

The Unbearable Sameness of EMR Websites

Most EMR product websites look and feel alike for three reasons.

  1. They are based on templates.
  2. They are “designed” by management.
  3. They are about similar products.

By “based on templates” I do not refer to templates used by EMRs, but rather to the templates into which is stuffed information about the EMR product. It used to be that you could tell a Frontpage website from a mile away. Now what’s obvious is the whole generic corporate sameness and lack of personality that characterizes most EMR websites.

By “designed by management” I mean that most EMR websites are designed to please upper level EMR vendor management (a la Dilbert’s Pointy-Haired Boss: “The website needs to be more webbish. But not too webbish.”). The result is a distance between the professional marketing orientation of the website and the immediate authentic experience and dreams of EMR users and designers.

By “similar products” I mean that most traditional EMRs are the clickity-clickity-click-click-click structured document management systems to which I referred in last week’s post.

Applying similar website templates to similar EMR products to please similar people yields similar outcomes. That’s why the EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Workflow System website doesn’t look like other EMR websites. You can’t tell a book by its cover, but sometimes you can tell an EMR by its website.

2009 AAP NCE EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Trip Report: Demos, Kickbikes, and Workflow

Short Link: http://j.mp/7ZpM37

I attended the 2009 American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference and Exhibition in Washington, DC. Here are some impressions and observations.

(I used to write long trip reports and email them to coworkers and friends. And then follow up: Did you read it? What do you think? More than one person diagnosed me as a frustrated blogger, which I steadfastly denied until earlier this year.)

Presidential Address by Dr David Tayloe (EncounterPRO User Since 1999)

Dr. David Tayloe, AAP’s 2008-2009 president, opened the conference by addressing healthcare reform and information technology. His summary of the strategic relationships among reform, EHRs, pediatric, and primary care was clear and compelling. He described a vision of each pediatric practice becoming their patients’ medical home, cited his own experience at Goldsboro Pediatrics in North Carolina, and pointed out that adult medicine has a lot to learn from pediatrics regarding progress in this area.

goldsboro

A Slide From Dr. Tayloe’s AAP Presidential Address

And yes, Goldsboro Pediatrics has been using the EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Workflow System since 1999.

Pediatric Documentation Challenge on Saturday, October 17th, 2009

Dr. Joseph Schneider moderated (wonderfully) the onstage demonstration of a complex pediatric scenario by eight EMR vendors, including theEncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Workflow System. He warned the audience the scenario was extra-complicated and not to expect anyone to complete the scenario in the allotted time. During introductory remarks he instructed the audience to pay special attention to interoperability and quality reporting on one hand, and workflow and ease of use on the other (and thank you, Dr. Schneider, for the public shout out to me about my decade long educational campaign for EMR workflow automation and usability).

I stayed for the entire series of demonstrations with what was initially about an audience of one hundred. Dr. Roy, using the EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Workflow System, was one of only two demonstrators who completed the pediatric scenario (I corroborated this assessment with several other diehards who also made it through the almost four hour session). Comparing seven traditional hunt-and-peck EMRs to an anticipatory EMR workflow system triggered considerable ideation on my part about EMR workflow, which I’ve “demoted” to a “Closing Thoughts” section below.

EncounterPRO Booth Traffic

We had steady booth traffic, from new folks interested in individualized demos and providing contact information for follow up investigation, and from existing customers (it’s always great to see a familiar face!)

booth

Here’s Brett Cleary(sales manager) and Kris Griffith (product manager) demoing and answering questions, and me, looking for a kickbiking partner.

Kickbiking DC’s Downtown Public Sculpture

As soon as the weather cleared up Sunday afternoon Dr. Roy and I took a three-hour tour of public art in downtown DC.

  • Modern Head by Roy Lichtenstein
  • The bronze reliefs at the Navy Memorial
  • And the sculpture gardens at the National and Hirshhorn art galleries

navy-memorial-beneroch

Dr. Roy Explaining Comparison of Femoral and Radial Pulses
as Depicted in the Navy Medicine Bronze Relief

kickbike-calder

Calder’s Red Horse in the National Art Gallery Sculpture Garden

Along our kickbikejourney we came up with:

The Top Ten Similarities between EMR Workflow Systems and Kickbikes

I’ve a web page about kickbikes on this blog. I’ve been meaning to post a paean to kickbiking; however there is a direct feed from this blog to a page on our product site. A headline there, about kickbikes, might seem a bit out of place. So, while walking up hills or waiting for traffic signals, we brainstormed the Top Ten Similarities between EMR Workflow Systems and kickbikes. Here’s the first draft. Some of these need some explanation. Watch for a longer post (in some future slow news week) with the same name as this subsection.

  1. Easy
  2. Unusual Appearance
  3. Fun
  4. Good for You
  5. Fast
  6. European Roots
  7. Child Friendly
  8. Extra Stable
  9. Endorsed by Me
  10. Designed by Physicians

(“Workflow” and “Kickbike” both have eight letters. Coincidence?)

Closing Thoughts about Apples, Oranges, and Peaches and A Decade of Market Education

As I watched the seven EMR apples and one EMR orange (or peach if you will, since we’re based in Atlanta), I was struck once again how similar traditional EMRsare to each other: large screens crammed with data and droves of data entry and order entry options. The user is the workflow engine, clicking on a succession of menus, tabs, buttons, checkboxes, textboxes, scroll bars, radio buttons not just to enter data and orders, but to get to the right tab, screen, dialog box, or popup. I’m a relatively trained observer since I’ve been participating in these events since the early days of TEPR’s documentation challenges—and *I* havetrouble remembering who is who. Other than location, color, finish, gradient, and minor aspects of widget shape (buttons with oval versus sharp corners, flat borders versus 3D bevels, etc.) all seven EMRs looked and worked more similarly than differently.

Traditional EMRs Rest on Structured Document Management Foundations

Traditional EMRs rest on database foundations that represent declarative knowledge about medicine and patients. Seems like a good foundation, right? But wrong from a workflow usability and process optimization point of view. Traditional EHRs are essentially structured document management systems (using relational databases to store structured data entered into document-like user interfaces and generate document-like reports) onto which are being grafted limited (and limiting, see discussion of “frozen” EMR workflow) degrees of task management. Traditional EHRs have lots of small targets on each screen that compete with each other for attention, plus the need for overt user direction to navigate from screen to screen. The smaller and more numerous EMR “targets” are, the more Fitts and Hicks Laws work against the user, resulting in slow, errorful data and order entry.

I recall a TEPR documentation challenge years ago that relied on what looked like at least a 12 foot wide 10 foot high projection screen. At one point the moderator actually had to walk over to the screen, crouch down, and don reading glasses to read a check box label. That’s small!

I did in fact notice at the AAP pediatric documentation challenge that, under time pressure and distraction (often from someone at the user’s elbow who was really trying to help), there were numerous times when the wrong check box or radio button was selected and then unselected. Human factor folks call these unintended user behaviors “slips” to distinguish them from intentional behavior called “mistakes.”

By the way, when I was a graduate student in Industrial Engineering at Illinois, I wrote a FORTRAN program that analyzed a stream of data from a PDP-11 that monitored a cockpit simulator (a Link Trainer, a *real* cockpit simulator, not a simulated simulator). The program flagged potential pilot errors (buttons they pushed, control surfaces they manipulated) during simulated emergencies. Then a human judge would try to figure out whether the errors were slips or mistakes. Of course, it’s been a few decades, so I could be mistaken.

Anticipatory EMR Workflow Systems Rely on Workflow Management Foundations

In contrast, EMR workflow systems rest on database foundations that represent procedural knowledge about medical workflows and processes, into which medical and patient knowledge and data are added and integrated. In which kind of EMR do you think workflows and processes are more easily understood, optimized, and monitored? Which kind of EMR will result in shortest patient wait times and encounter length? Highest task throughput and patient volume? The answer is the reason why productivity numbers are so good in the three HIMSS Davies Award-winning applications submitted by the two pediatricians, and one ob/gyn-family medicine physician, who use an EMR Workflow System.

Understanding of EMR Workflow and Business Process Management in Healthcare is Gradually Increasing

Picture a graph that depicts progress toward higher and higher levels of market understanding of, and appreciation for, workflow management systems, EMR workflow systems, and business process management. By “workflow” and “workflow management” I don’t mean the meaningless ad copy that is thrown around and sprinkled on most EMR brochures and vendor websites. By “workflow management” I mean the same thing as what professionals and academics and workflow and business process management system vendors mean in the workflow and business process management system industry.

path2731

The X axis for that graph is now 10 years long. Data points are based on an unscientific series of impressions and vignettes: questions I received from an audience, a presentation I attended, a conversation in our exhibit booth. I began to see material on the web besides my own around 2004, plus have an occasional encouraging conversation. But it wasn’t until recently that I began to get the impression of a large uptick surrounding recent discussions of certification, usability, and meaningful use.

At the 2004 Fort Lauderdale TEPR show a physician watched a demo of EncounterPRO, asked a couple of questions about the customizability of the screen sequences, and exclaimed “This is a workflow management system, isn’t it?” 2004 was the first of three years that I gave a three hour TEPR tutorial about workflow management systems in healthcare, so I assumed that he had just sat through that session, but he hadn’t. Before becoming a physician he had simply worked in one of the many industries in which workflow management systems are more prevalent. He’d seen them before and so could recognize one when he saw one again.

Another example: at this years AAP one of my booth mates said “Shoot, you just missed him! This fellow was walked by, saw our sign [“EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR Workflow System”], stopped dead in his tracks, and exclaimed ‘Workflow System! I’ve seen lots in other industries, but I’ve never seen a workflow system in health care!” He was an ER physician not shopping for an EMR, but I thought you should know.” Shoot! I missed him! Add a data point to my 1999 to 2009 TEPR-HIMSS-MedInfo-AAP WfMS/BPMS Progress Graph!

EMR systems will need to become EMR workflow, and EMR business process, management systems, if they are to achieve the meaningful use that will be necessary to participate in the positive transformation of the US healthcare system. I do see progress. The “planets” (that is, federal initiatives, educated consumers, compelling case studies, and thought leadership) are aligning. It should start getting very interesting, right…about…now.

An Unsolicited but Greatly Appreciated Testimonial from EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR User Michael Anderson, MD, FAAP

Short Link: http://j.mp/64WHfZ

childrens-pediatric-center-canton1

From: mga CHILDRENSPedtrcsCtrEastMain [email address deleted]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 1:06 PM
To: Frank Martin; Chuck Webster
Subject: Our Thoughts on EncounterPRO

Please contact me about my enthusiasm for our EncounterPRO System, and how we may continue to promote your outstanding improvement in our ability to give excellent pediatric care.  I wish to express that ….
 
We noted even at the The University of Michigan’s Mott Children’s Hospital, where medical informatics is a strategic priority, the EncounterPRO EMR, surpasses even the best system that we had ever previously seen.  The benefits, for both the academic and community pediatrician, are such that now I cannot imagine practice without the efficiency and quality this particular EMR brings to the pediatrician. 
 
GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT:  for pediatrics, the ability to plot and chart growth and development real-time, allows our parents to see and take-home a printing of their child’s growth chart and graph, weight, height, etc., in real-time that demonstrates the patient’s percentiles over time.  The milestones, as tedious as they are, are easily presented, for checking at the development visits, so that not a single one is missed, and all recorded at the same time as evaluation. 
 
SICK VISITS:  The templates WE have been able to easily developer and save, with ease even while I am seeing patients, provides a fast and simple way for our practice to give a consistent standard of care throughout the group, and even while teaching residents, we provide a systematic approach for every patient. 
 
DOCUMENTATION AND BILLING:  Having the ICD codes attached to every diagnosis, provides superb documentation, and assists us in ordering labs and studies, and most of all having appropriate ICD codes match with the CPT codes.  The EncounterPRO EMR dovetails with the Office Management Software, even third party providers, such that submitting a clean claim, the first and every time, is no longer a struggle.  We no longer need to have a full-time coder, EncounterPRO makes sure every diagnosis has the proper ICD code, and that these are appropriately linked with the CPT code, seamlessly presented to the Pediatrician while completing the chart. 
 
SAVES MONEY & GENERATES INCOME:  The software’s data base of ICD and CPT codes, linked to the medical terminology that Pediatrician’s naturally use, saves the expensive coding services that we have had to so long suffer in the past.  Now our billing and collections team can focus on the business, and not the medical terminology.  Further, EncounterPRO makes sure we are offered the relevant choices, as pediatricians, while we are charting.  Important charges and not accidently missed, such as ancillary procedures and even medical supplies that can be covered by payers, if only the Pediatrician remembers to code for the service.  This has increased our ability to truly code and bill for the services we were previously providing, but now are able to document appropriately.  We have noted not only savings but improved revenue. 
 
PATIENT SATISFACTION:  EncounterPRO keeps track of the time the patient waits, and the time each service provider, both support staff, and medical staff, for every patient.  Having these running clocks, visible on the screen while the patient is moving through the office template, keeps us all aware of where every patient is, what they are waiting for, what they need, and how long it is taking us to provide the service.  We have noted an immediate 50% reduction in wait times, just from the efficiency obtained when the data is easily visible to the whole team.  We now can boast, not apologies, about our cycle times.  Our patient love the printed prescriptions, that are easy for the pharmacists to read, and the time saved by pointing and clicking, instead of writing is more accurate and faster.  The new e-prescribing feature allows us to choose and reward those pharmacies who best serve our patients.  We have found that small locally-owed pharmacies are eager to serve our patients quickly and with a complimentry attitude toward our practice.  In short, the patient satisfaction from the EncounterPRO system is another value.
 
We are grateful for the EncounterPRO team, and how they have partnered with us for a more successful way to serve our patients.  Beyond the fees associated for the service and the product, we want to write a heart-felt thank you for an outstanding advance in our ability to serve our most important pediatric patients.

MICHAEL GEORGE ANDERSON, MD, MBA, ESQ, FAAP

President and Corporate General Counsel

CHILDREN’S PEDIATRICS CENTERS – EAST MAIN
391 East Main Street
Canton, Georgia 30114
http://ChildrensPediatrics.com
http://HappyHealthy.com

Pediatrician Dr. Roy Benaroch, Author of Two Books on Child Health, to Demo EncounterPRO EMR at AAP National Conference

Short Link: http://j.mp/4BWvbG

Dr. Roy Benaroch (Dr. Roy) will demonstrate the High-Usability EncounterPRO Pediatric Workflow System at the AAP Pediatric Documentation Challenge™ on Saturday, October 17, 2009 – 2:00-5:45pm, at the American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference & Exhibition in Washington, DC.

benaroch-larger-midtones

The AAP Pediatric Documentation Challenge™ is Session E1087 and will take place in the Technology Learning Center – Room 149 at the Washington Convention Center. Dr. Roy is tentatively scheduled for 3:03 PM, but arrive early to get a seat. Dr. Roy has demoed the EncounterPRO Pediatric EMR at previous AAP national conferences. EncounterPRO has demoed at all previous AAP Pediatric Documentation Challenges. Visit us at Booth 1543 in the exhibit hall.

From all the folks at EncounterPRO Healthcare Resources, thank you Dr. Roy!

AAP Pediatric Documentation Challenge™
Saturday, October 17, 2009 – 2:00-5:45pm
Washington Convention Center
Technology Learning Center – Room 149
Session E1087

3:03 pm The EncounterPRO EHR, Version 5
EncounterPRO Healthcare Resources, Inc
Demonstrator: Roy Benaroch, MD, FAAP

Dr. Roy was born and raised in Miami, Florida. There, he was an avid SCUBA diver and State Champion Pente player. During his years at Tulane University pursuing a degree in Biomedical Engineering, Dr. Roy performed in several musicals and rock and roll bands, playing keyboards, saxophone, bass guitar, and singing. He has lived in the Atlanta area since beginning medical school at Emory University in 1990. Dr. Roy completed residency through the Emory University Affiliated Hospitals in 1997, and then served as Chief Resident and Instructor in the Department of Pediatrics. He has continued his involvement on the Emory faculty as an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics. He was Board Certified in Pediatrics in 1997 and joined Pediatric Physicians, PC in 1998. Dr. Roy lives in Dunwoody, Georgia, with his wife and three children. In addition to his work as a pediatrician, Dr. Roy enjoys swimming, vegetable gardening, and writing. Dr. Roy has written two books for parents, Solving Health and Behavioral Problems from Birth to Preschool: A Parent’s Guide and A Guide to Getting the Best Healthcare for Your Child. His blog, The Pediatric Insider, features more of Dr. Roy’s essays on many parenting and health topics.

benaroch-guide-to-getting-the-best-health-care-for-your-child

 A Guide to Getting the Best Health Care for Your Child

5.0 out of 5 stars Dr. Roy fan!, July 24, 2007

“Dr. Benaroch has been my children’s pediatrician for several years now, and I can’t say enough good about him. This is not one of those books written for a few bucks or fifteen minutes of fame. Dr. “Roy”, as all his patients lovingly call him, practices what he preaches. He is just as genuine, helpful, good-natured, and compassionate as a pediatrician can get… and is unarguably THE BEST! No wonder why many of my friends and acquaintances go to him for their child’s health care. I remember the huge amount of support he gave me, the mom, after the birth of my third child. I felt like I got therapy for me as well as a fantastic check-up for my baby. I’m thrilled to have his new book filled with useful and caring information. Can’t wait for his third book! Thank you Dr. Roy!!!”

benaroch-solving-health-and-behavior-problems-from-birth-through-preschool

 Solving Health and Behavioral Problems from
Birth through Preschool: A Parent’s Guide

5.0 out of 5 stars Great book!, January 19, 2008

“This book is full of great information for all those medical/behavior issues you are unsure about when you have a little one. We pull it out all the time when one of our children has a rash, earache or even as we tackled potty training! The book is humorous and easy to read! We have found our newest “baby gift” because it will be used for years to come, unlike a rattle or toy!”

Dr. Roy has contributed to numerous podcasts at Pediatrics for Parents:

Pediatrics for Parents Show 57 – …Dr. Roy Benaroch talks about the flu and the flu vaccine….

Pediatrics For Parents Show 55…Dr. Roy Benaroch answers question on MRSA and allergies….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 45…Dr. Roy Benaroch explains tears in babies….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 44…Dr. Roy Benaroch gives his thoughts on autism….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 43…Dr. Roy Benaroch explains pink eye and its treatment….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 42…Dr. Roy Benaroch explains the FDA’s ruling on children’s cough and cold medicines….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 41…Dr. Roy Benaroch gives his opinion on Jessica Seinfeld’s new book, Deceptively Delicious….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 38 …Dr. Roy Benaroch discusses the latest in vaccine news….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 37…Dr. Roy Benaroch answers your questions….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 31…Dr. Roy Benaroch talks about when to call the doctors….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 30…Dr. Roy Benaroch answers your questions….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 28…Dr. Roy Benaroch talks about safe sites for health information….

Pediatrics for Parents Show 27…Dr. Roy Benarock describes ways to save on medication costs….

Again, thank you for all you do, Dr. Roy.