In our comparison of Cerner vs. Epic, Epic is the best option with a higher overall Wheelhouse Score. Wheelhouse Score uses a combination of feature and pricing comparison data, average user ratings, and editorial reviews to score software vendors on a scale of 1-10.
* Vendor does not share prices.
* Vendor does not share prices.
Using it is simple, the features are nicely connected.
It is old-fashioned.
The enhanced features for research in this system (e.g. the ability to get to records from other agencies which wok with EPIC) are the reason why we’re continuously using it. Regarding research, invoicing and compliance, this software has been of great help.
The features that improve the ability to perform research in an educational hospital are present in EPIC. To make sure that the right fees are passed to the research study/insurance, there are methods to generate lists of patients, monitor billing, and get tailored alerts. Running reports after determining and monitoring participation and advancement of research is simple.
Some research aspects are non-intuitive. Picking up a few back end reporting systems takes time due to the learning curve present.
This is a normal program and I could deal it with all its shortcomings. But luckily there are better ones also available in the market.
It was great for the mental health side. The comprehensive assessments, releases, and forms could be customized into the system in the way we want it to be. Customer support was prompt in case there was any problem, especially with the super users.
The program is good, but it is outdated. The version did not work for all the departments. We would have preferred something like behavioral health overall, at least substance abuse could be included.
Epic Care has a relevant interface suited for the clinical environment and a set up that is rather simple with the new layout with tab sections for the clinician. It coordinates the work and keeps continuity in the facility. Also, it helps to find out how much work still needs to be completed. It is also an important development that our institution is employing a new version which would create a flawless evenness between outpatient and inpatient.
There are no cons as such but a suggestion that EPIC should develop new ways that clinicians can come out with that would help them showcase their own unique skills based on their specialty. It may look difficult in the beginning. But, this way there will be an improvement in clinical efficiency.
Using it is simple, the features are nicely connected.
It is old-fashioned.
This is a normal program and I could deal it with all its shortcomings. But luckily there are better ones also available in the market.
It was great for the mental health side. The comprehensive assessments, releases, and forms could be customized into the system in the way we want it to be. Customer support was prompt in case there was any problem, especially with the super users.
The program is good, but it is outdated. The version did not work for all the departments. We would have preferred something like behavioral health overall, at least substance abuse could be included.
The enhanced features for research in this system (e.g. the ability to get to records from other agencies which wok with EPIC) are the reason why we’re continuously using it. Regarding research, invoicing and compliance, this software has been of great help.
The features that improve the ability to perform research in an educational hospital are present in EPIC. To make sure that the right fees are passed to the research study/insurance, there are methods to generate lists of patients, monitor billing, and get tailored alerts. Running reports after determining and monitoring participation and advancement of research is simple.
Some research aspects are non-intuitive. Picking up a few back end reporting systems takes time due to the learning curve present.
Epic Care has a relevant interface suited for the clinical environment and a set up that is rather simple with the new layout with tab sections for the clinician. It coordinates the work and keeps continuity in the facility. Also, it helps to find out how much work still needs to be completed. It is also an important development that our institution is employing a new version which would create a flawless evenness between outpatient and inpatient.
There are no cons as such but a suggestion that EPIC should develop new ways that clinicians can come out with that would help them showcase their own unique skills based on their specialty. It may look difficult in the beginning. But, this way there will be an improvement in clinical efficiency.
Add suggested to comparison
In our rating and review comparison of Cerner vs. Epic, Epic has 75 user reviews and Cerner has 15. The average star rating for Epic is 4.49 while Cerner has an average rating of 3.93. Epic has more positive reviews than Cerner. Comparing Cerner vs. Epic reviews, Epic has stronger overall reviews.
Cerner vs. Epic both offer a strong set of features and functionality including Medical Practice Management Features, Patient Management, eRX, Medical Charting, Laboratory Management, Insurance Claim Management, Accounting Features, Cash Flow Management, Portal Types, Customizable Items, File Management, Reporting & Analytics, Identity and Access Management (IAM), Integration Options, Compliance Accreditations, After-Sales Service, Medical Specialties. In our feature comparison of Cerner vs. Epic, Epic offers more of the most popular features and tools than Cerner.
In our pricing comparison of Cerner vs. Epic, Epic's pricing starts at N/A/month and is more affordable compared to Epic's starting cost of N/A/month.
Our comparison of Cerner vs. Epic shows that Epic scores higher in usability for learning curve, ease of admin. Cerner scores higher in ease of use, meets requirements, setup & support, quality of support, but Epic has the best scores overall for system usability.
Get your personalized recommendations now.
