Although I appreciate it when @debi_peterson or another PW employee tags someone who may be able to fix an issue, I have to wonder why we don't see responses after that.
Much like the suggestion platform. Is it there merely to patronize us? I have seen numerous offices request the same things over and over and yet they are never implemented. BASIC, FUNCTIONING MODIFICATIONS and yet no movement from Carestream. Two simple examples are: Being able to add an age restriction to code-specific details. Being able to customize the route slip to fit our needs.
WHEN WILL OUR REQUESTS EVER BE ACTED ON??
It's been a while since I have checked the exchange. I agree with sentiments of the users posted under "Frustrations". At the recommendation of a consultant, we became a PW user about 1997. That is a long time to use the product, have a support fee and to continue to have a product not work well. It appears that updates are not tested prior to release.
Treatment estimates and insurance estimating at check out is crucial to be accurate. Patients complain about the layout of the statements (they are difficult to read) and the amount owed may not be the amount owed. I cannot speak for other practices; this practice uses the software as it was designed and to best as it was intended. We have had numerous crashes when posting bulk payments, having to run "UTILITIES" and then to have a Level 2 to remove the payment and check the "back" for possible issues. This takes so much extra time. And this particular issue requires every user to be out of PW.
Maybe the Product Manager could provide a "Press Release" for what we can expect in the future regarding known bugs, estimating issues, etc.
I don't use the word hate often, although in this case, I Hate to look unprofessional when presenting fees because the software isn't providing the correct number. Well the information is what we have entered into the system and it is spitting out garbage.
I guess I am having a bad day because of PW issues and the insurance estimating side of things.
"It's a known issue" and "there's a work around" are phrases we hear regularly from PW support. I brought up the issue with dual insurance estimating 10 years ago when I first started working with practice works. Here we are, 10 years and several versions later, I still get treatment plans where the math does not add up. I am still handwriting on my treatment plans because 1 + 1 = 0. Not only is this very unprofessional (not to mention embarrassing) to give to patients, basic math is the primary function of any computer, and we still can't get that right. Regardless of how many kudos I received several years ago about this, this issue should be a high enough priority to be fixed. I share in the frustration of others. Managing a very busy dental practice has enough challenges, our software should not be one of them.
Thank you for showing so much passion for Practiceworks in this thread! I'd like to reassure you all that we do continue to support and make changes to Practiceworks with releases, which we try to make quarterly.
The inputs for each of these releases come from a variety of sources, including the Exchange, but also items logged through support, and regulatory needs.
Each item is prioritised against each other, in terms on its impact to our customer base, the number of customers we hear asking for the same item etc.
I would like to encourage continual feedback for improvements, which can continue to take into consideration. And feedback on the releases we make, what you liked, did not like etc. This helps considerably with our planning.
@gmrdmd 100%! If it is a great suggestion that will improve the performance, it should need only to be brought to their attention. They have changed features (without warning us) for far lesser things (I was told one change was because practices kept forgetting to enter a zip code....are you KIDDING ME?). And apparently adding an "unspecified" to gender identity was more important than the functionality of the software. I'm not saying that there it shouldn't be there, but there are FAR more critical changes that we have needed for years.
To your point about a "popularity vote":
I totally agree. I have been a customer of Carestream for close to 15 years and have experienced similar problems. One current specific issue comes to mind. I recently acquired a logo and was unable to place it into the documents unless it was sized down to 6 KB which is silly. I was then told that this was a known problem since version 7.5 Really! How many years ago was that? And why hasn't it been addressed?
The interesting part is that I really like the Practiceworks program and I believe their tech support is excellent. I was also a Beta tester for version 9. We are also chartless.
But what Practiceworks doesn't understand is that we are always trying to put our best representation of ourselves (ie the practice) forth to the public, or in my case as a Periodontist to my referring doctors. Again, (referring to my last case with them) making the documents on the computer for my reports look as good as possible is a plus for me and by extension the software company that allows me to put that product forward.
Practiceworks will continually tell me to place my concerns online and if I receive enough "kudos" they will consider it. Well sometimes when ideas can improve your product it should be implemented and not just be a popularity vote.
Case in point - see the response just received regarding topic
Which was originally asked about in 2017 and was told that it was being looked at for future versions. How many versions have come out since 8.0 and it is still not implemented????