FOR PHYSICIANS EVALUATING SAISYSTEMS
Is Saisystems Slowing Down Your Documentation?
Saisystems has a presence in the LTPAC EHR space, and groups using it have their reasons. The most common reason we hear for exploring a switch is documentation speed. Rounding physicians want fewer clicks between "start note" and "done."
ChartPath's documentation screen was built specifically to minimize that click count for SNF rounding visits, with PCC census flowing in directly so you're not re-entering information the facility already has.
What slows documentation down more than people expect
It's rarely one big obstacle. It's usually a documentation structure that requires navigating through sections that don't apply to a rounding visit, plus a separate step to pull or confirm resident information the facility system already has.
Every extra screen is a small tax on your day. For a physician charting twenty or more visits, that tax adds up to real time.
Fewer screens between starting and finishing a note
The encounter workflow was designed around rounding specifically, not adapted from a broader template.
PCC integration built in
Resident information pulls automatically instead of requiring manual confirmation.
Billing tied to the same record
No separate export step needed to get a visit from documented to billed.
ChartPath vs. Saisystems, On Documentation Speed
This comparison focuses specifically on documentation speed for SNF rounding, which is the most common reason physicians look at switching.
Where It Matters
Saisystems
ChartPath
PCC integration
Varies
Built in, bi-directional
Documentation structure
General LTPAC template
Purpose-built for rounding
Billing built into documentation
Often separate
Same record, no export
Time to full adoption
Varies
Typically 2 to 4 weeks
See your actual documentation time, side by side.
Bring a recent note. We'll time how long the same visit takes in ChartPath.