WebPT

WebPT Review by Physical Therapy clinic

Comentarios: I use WebPT daily because I get authorization for the patients that are doing Physical Therapy in our clinic. I review the notes and use the information to submit my authorization requests. We see approximately 20-30 patients a day so I'm looking over a lot of WebPT therapy notes.

Puntos a favor:

It has very clear templates and it's easy to find information. The records are very easy for even a layperson to understand, but thorough enough that the insurance companies easily provide authorization for services. Even when we need to have a substitute from an agency they are able to plug the information into the note and keep to the format we are used to thanks to WebPT

Puntos en contra:

I don't like that it costs money to integrate each aspect separately, we currently have an account you can't use for billing. I also can't see the calendar view so if the name of a patient is misspelled it's hard to pull up their account.

WebPT is good BUT expensive!

Comentarios: Decent experience. Very functional but tedious with time consumption. There are a lot better options available with more inclusive features for less cost.

Puntos a favor:

Easy to understand. Able to create evaluation and treatment templates so that you didn't have to write the same verbiage. Could carry over notes from the time before.

Puntos en contra:

Expensive. Require multiple tabs open for the same patient because the SOAP note and the exercise flowsheet were not on the same page. It took 15-20 minutes to complete a note because of toggling between multiple tabs. Offered a lot of features for exercises and CRM but all extra features were a la carte. The expense for a solo practitioner and then to add users was too expensive. It would have been better to charge per number of visits per month vs. number of users. EMR and billing integration was not as synced as should have bee.

Comentarios: I work for a small, privately owned outpatient practice with three clinic sites. We recently began using WebPT. Over the course of my schooling and employment, I have used approximately six or seven different EMR programs. Overall, I would rate WebPT in the top three or four of those programs. They are doing a number of things right, but leave much to be desired. I think WebPT's biggest downfall is its lack of efficiency, which, at times, is costing our clinicians valuable treatment time with our patients. There are a number of extra steps that one must take in order to complete documentation on initial evaluations, flowsheets, and home exercise programs. Below are a list of some of the problems we have experienced along with suggestions for improvement. 1. When creating IE templates, we are currently unable to view the details of the tabs we are selecting. If the details of selected tabs end up being different than expected, we must later go back and modify the template after we perform the eval. To fix this, enable viewing of IE tab details when creating templates.
2. When entering diagnosis codes, the search bar does not always register keywords, making it difficult to quickly find appropriate diagnosis codes. To fix this, improve search capability in the diagnosis code box. (e.g. - enter keyword "shoulder" and all diagnoses with "shoulder" pop up).
3. We have experienced issues with notes not saving (or not formatting into a PDF document) due to using symbols (e.g. - &, #, *, /, -) in our documentation. To fix this, enable the use of symbols without need for extra spacing to improve efficiency of use for clinicians.
4. It is difficult and time-consuming to find specific exercises in the flowsheet and home exercise program due to the search bar requiring a very specific order/combination of words. Improve search capability in flowsheet and HEP (e.g. - enter keywords "shoulder AAROM" and all exercises with those words in no particular order should pop up). If WebPT is unable to do this, then at the very least provide a paper copy of exercises with their titles (in categorical or alphabetical order) to clinics for use as a quick reference.
5. When you are able to find exercises in the HEP, the results page requires you click a tab to see the remaining exercises. To fix this, get rid of the "see more results" box in the HEP, and simply have all exercises appear on one page.
6. The flowsheet and HEP do not link to one another. If they did, developing a HEP would be much more efficient. We are currently doing twice the work when we have to search for exercises in the HEP after we already listed them in the flowsheet. (As discussed in #4, this is a time consuming process). To fix this, provide an option/tab to carry exercises from the flowsheet to the HEP. Also, enable a feature to view exercises in the flowsheet before selecting them (to ensure we are ultimately selecting the exercises we want on patients' HEPs).
7. We are currently unable to share HEP templates with other clinicians unless each clinician searches through other therapist's patient records to find a previously created HEP template. This is impractical and inefficient. To fix this, provide an option for us to create HEP templates that may be shared by all clinicians. (e.g. - an option similar to the public IE templates).
8. There is currently no option to add photos of customized exercises that are not found on WebPT. To fix this, add an option for us to upload our own photos for use in our HEPs.
9. When adding exercises to flowsheets, they do not stay in a consistent order. Therefore, clinicians end up scrolling up/down the flowsheet repeatedly to find the exercise that was added. Furthermore, after we order exercises they fall out of order if we then add further exercises. To fix this, default placement of exercises to the bottom of the flowsheet when they are added in order to improve organization and efficiency .
10. If autosave is on when the flowsheet is previewed (but not finalized), it duplicates the charges for the same date of service when we attempt to add further exercises. Therefore, we must go through and delete each exercise for one date of service before finalizing the document in order to avoid doubling exercise minutes. To fix this, enable us to preview flowsheets without incurring changes to them.

WEBPT IS THE ONLY CHOICE FOR PHYSICAL THERAPY ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS!

Comentarios: Currently, we utilize WEBPT in a very busy outpatient physical therapy clinic. When we started looking for EMR software a few years ago, we saw that there were very few Physical Therapy choices available that incorporated everything we were looking for in an EMR. It is very user-friendly, even for the technically challenged users in our clinic. One of the more important aspects of WEBPT is the efficient way we are kept compliant with all things Medicare! When Medicare requirements change, WEBPT will implement those changes well in advance of the start date, along with the necessary training. This ensures that clinics are comfortable with the changes and aren't scrambling at the last minute, wondering if their claims will get paid, or if their documentation is on point. I cannot stress how much we are pleased with WEBPT. It is THE ONLY CHOICE for Rehab Professionals!!

Puntos a favor:

Ease of Use Efficiency with Front Office Package Documentation is very straight forward Customer Service Reps Compliance with Insurance Changes Schedule is easy to use and read

Puntos en contra:

Fewer clicks between tabs

a flexible tool

Comentarios: The reports are helping us track our referral sources
Adapting the content sections is helpful as we are using the system in a unique manner.

Puntos a favor:

I am using the tool for my driver rehab services; selection of topics is possible for individuals Using the reports is something we are just starting to venture into as we have more patients.

Puntos en contra:

limited ability to set up a custom structure which was something that sold us to this program. My time is spent doing the same tasks for each assessment. The layout of the assessment leaves disturbing spaces There seems to be inconsistent success with sending faxes