All messages should be posted in plain text. HTML will be converted to attachments. The meditech-l web site is MTUsers.com ======================================
thanks Terry, we have found that if we don't delete the previous run we avoid the problem of not having interaction checking during the two day run process. I still am wondering why these run times are so long as compared to FDB. Ron -----Original Message----- From: Terry Crissman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:55 AM To: McBride, Ronald Subject: RE: [MEDITECH-L] Micromedex vs First DataBank Ron, I'm not sure if our interaction checking is disabled after the run is deleted. I would not think this would delete interaction checking because the generic codes,etc should remain attached to your drugs. Meditech has been looking at the length of time it takes to process the Micromedex files for 6 months or longer...before the 5.4 downgrade :), it only took about 12 hours to process a run. Terry -----Original Message----- From: McBride, Ronald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:52 PM To: Terry Crissman Cc: Meditech L (E-mail) Subject: RE: [MEDITECH-L] Micromedex vs First DataBank thanks Terry, Wow, I was thinking that our run time seemed very long..... have you had problems with interaction checking not working when you delete the last run. When are you deleting it? Only after a successful file , I would imagine.... I don't know that we have had this problem with the monographs......... I will check Ron -----Original Message----- From: Terry Crissman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:47 AM To: McBride, Ronald Subject: RE: [MEDITECH-L] Micromedex vs First DataBank Ron, Perhaps there are more issues that I'm aware of. The allergy checking seems to work well with Micromedex for us while I've seen complaints on the list about FDB not screening well. Within the last few weeks we've sent numerous dose range corrections/suggestions to Micromedex for editing. Micromedex has been responsive in editing those where we have shown good documentation. I think the dose/range feature has/is problematic for all vendors. We recently submitted a request to Micromedex because of the lack of a therapeutic dup alert for a COX2 and Naproxen. Micromedex suggested we had some flag set in Meditech blocking this, which isn't the case at all. I asked them to look at it gain. It takes our system about 36 to 48 hours to process a "run" which sure seems like a long time and if something interrupts the process, we get to start all over again (power flicker, etc). If I don't delete the last run, our Monographs don't populate the data fields and we can't print them. That is why I always delete the previous run. Terry -----Original Message----- From: McBride, Ronald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:26 AM To: Terry Crissman Cc: Schmoll, Lois; Darger, Dana Subject: RE: [MEDITECH-L] Micromedex vs First DataBank Hi Terry, We have a number of issues, the most critical are: One of the problems was because of a buffer overflow that occurred while loading file 42 of the 53 files into the system. We did not get any warning or any indication that the upload did not complete properly nor do we have any way to determine if all the files uploaded successfully. I believe that we have a DTS now that has fixed this. We have had issues with duplicates not flagging and interaction checking on IV's not working. The recommended updating process of Micromedex from Meditech leaves the Pharmacy without interaction checking for the majority of the hours it takes to upload and file . Meditech recommends deleting the old run as the first step to the formulary upload process and it should not affect interaction checking. The fact is that it indeed does leave the pharmacy without interaction checking. We have changed this process so they are without interaction checking only for a brief period by never deleting the run files. Do you have any of the above issues?? thanks, Ron McBride RN Clinical Analyst Meditech Workgroup Rapid City Regional Hospital 353 Fairmont Blvd Rapid City, SD 57701 Phone: 605-719-8032 Fax: 605-719-4693 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Terry Crissman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:10 AM To: McBride, Ronald Subject: RE: [MEDITECH-L] Micromedex vs First DataBank Ron, We are Magic Meditech 5.5 and have Micromedex/Ultimedex. Can you mention what your issues are? We're having a few with erroneous dose range alerts. Terry -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of McBride, Ronald Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 4:37 PM To: Meditech L (E-mail) Subject: [MEDITECH-L] Micromedex vs First DataBank All messages should be posted in plain text. HTML will be converted to attachments. The meditech-l web site is MTUsers.com ====================================== Hello, We are Magic 5.4.2 and are looking at switching from Micromedex to some other Formulary service such as First DataBank. Is there anyone out there using First Databank? I would be interested to know what your experience has been. We have had a number of issues with Micromedex. any help would be appreciated. thanks, Ron McBride RN Clinical Analyst Meditech Workgroup Rapid City Regional Hospital 353 Fairmont Blvd Rapid City, SD 57701 Phone: 605-719-8032 Fax: 605-719-4693 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ meditech-l mailing list [email protected] http://mtusers.com/mailman/listinfo/meditech-l _______________________________________________ meditech-l mailing list [email protected] http://mtusers.com/mailman/listinfo/meditech-l
