- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Topic
-
Would like to commiserate on some interfafe issues we are having with 3m’s autoencoder product and technical support…..espcially documents that are encoded. 1. What is your level of satisfaction with their integratino resources?
2. What is the extent of Cloverleaf work necessary before HIM began using? IF currrently using EPIC…are you interfacing clinical docs from epic or combination of epic “source” documentation as well as ancillary based system docs?
3. Words of warning
❗ befoer going live with the clinical side (CAC) and autoencoding…?I know a little outside the “regexp”-like subject matter….but really wanted to use the word “Commiserate”…root word – miserableintransitive verb
: to feel or express sympathy : condole
transitive verb
: to feel or express sorrow or compassion for
-
Replies
-
-
It’s a frustrating process.
We interface docs from Epic to 3M CAC. We were sending from source systems as well, except it didn’t work properly. CAC needs to work off the billing account number, not the clinical encounter number, but all our other systems (pathology and radiology) need to work on the clinical encounter number to work properly. It was a pain getting those other downstream systems to track multiple encounter numbers, so we ended up re-tooling and everything now comes straight from Epic.
We don’t do a whole lot in Cloverleaf to get the documents to CAC; it handles messages straight from the print server about as well as it does anything. The base-64 encoding is a pain.
Picking the right print groups in Epic to determine what to send, and configuring them right, took us a while to get right. That’s not really an interface thing, but it ended up on our plate here because nobody else could seem to figure it out.
Good luck, and I hope things go better for you than they did for us.
-
-
My client is implementing 3M CAC and CDIS together with Meditech Magic.
1. What is your level of satisfaction with their integratino resources?
1a. Horrible. We were given several specifications, all in different formats. The resource doesn’t have tools to troubleshoot issues (his words). Constantly tells us that “other site do not do it like this.” We’re made to feel like all issues are our fault or issue to resolve. Usually there default response, without doing any investigation on there part is “did you look at the specifications?” or “EPIC doesn’t do it like this.”
2. What is the extent of Cloverleaf work necessary before HIM began using? IF currrently using EPIC…are you interfacing clinical docs from epic or combination of epic “source” documentation as well as ancillary based system docs?
2a. My client is sending documents from many different system to CAC / CDIS. We had to test extensively. We are post go-live and still cleaning up issues with a few reports.
3. Words of warning befoer going live with the clinical side (CAC) and autoencoding…?
3a. Everything post go-live seems to be working correctly. But getting this applications implemented was a huge pain.
Nice to hear we’re not alone.
- Jared Parish
-
anyone successfully implemented the HTTPS EPIC 2017 interface for their document sending interface to 3m CAC
We have the secure messenger product sftp/ ftps and https client.
We do not have CAA
Would love to talk with anyone out there that has successfully/or unsuccessfully attempting the HTTPS inerace with epic
Thanks Bob
-
-
We have two document sending interfaces out of Epic (kind=226) that go through Interconnect then to cloverleaf using the java/ws-server protocol. One is for MDM messages in RTF format and the other is MDM messages in plain text. The RTF one has been running that way for a few years and the plain text was just converted to it thanks to Epic sunsetting the kind=26 interfaces. I can try to answer any questions you have about it.
Paul Bishop
Carle Foundation Hospital
Urbana, IL
-
- The forum ‘Cloverleaf’ is closed to new topics and replies.
