Praxis EMR vs McKesson EMR

Along with a robust set of features for functions like billing and charting, Praxis EMR also provides a wide range of options to customize the product according to physician requirements. Its intuitiveness and the ability to learn from its users is also an important benefit. However, user feedback suggests a steep learning curve with the product, which may take some time to get used to. All in all, the product can be a good choice for practitioners who want a highly customizable EMR.

Is McKesson EMR the real deal or just a McKesson mess? User reviews paint a mixed picture of the software, with some praising its ease of use and integration capabilities, while others lament its shortcomings and lack of innovation. McKesson EMR's user-friendly interface is a major selling point, with users consistently highlighting its intuitive design and ease of navigation. The software's seamless integration with practice management software is another key strength, streamlining workflows and reducing administrative burden. However, users have expressed concerns about the software's limited functionality and lack of advanced features, particularly when compared to competitors like Epic and Cerner. Some users have also reported issues with the software's stability and reliability, citing frequent glitches and slow performance. McKesson EMR is best suited for smaller practices that prioritize ease of use and integration over advanced functionality. The software's user-friendly interface and seamless integration with practice management software make it a good choice for practices that are new to EMR or have limited IT resources. However, larger practices or those with complex needs may find the software's limited functionality and lack of innovation to be a major drawback.