theclay is right - the benefit is to make physicians more efficient and to allow them access to tools that benefit the public as a whole. They shouldn't have to spend the majority of their time trying to negotiate insurances and medicare/medicaid (which, by the way, rarely pay the amount it can cost the physician) - they should be focusing on practicing medicine. Using EMRs/EHRs allows physicians to automate part of that process, as well as giving them more analysis of patients.

I can't tell if this is serious or not. Either way, it seems like we all benefit from devices that make doctors more effective.

> Either way, it seems like we all benefit from devices that make doctors more effective.

The problem with your statement and approval is in no way justifies the magic $44K number. Why not a $2 billion incentive for each doctor that switches?

I'm assuming it's based on the perceived cost of the software in question(not just Dr Chrono but all EMR system). I was surprised that Dr Chrono doesn't charge around that for it's software. A lot of those packages have so few clients that it needs to be priced ridiculously to make it viable. This is mostly due to over kill design by committee that makes it's expensive to develop. Dr Chrono as a small shop probably has the advantage here.

I think many older physicians would disagree with you that EHRs make their life easier.