Top 12 eClinicalWorks Alternatives in 2025

If you’re dealing with eClinicalWorks’ performance issues and surprise billing changes, you’re not alone. Healthcare providers across the country are actively searching for better electronic health record solutions that actually work when they need them most.

After extensive research and analysis of user feedback, we’ve compiled the most comprehensive list of alternatives that address the specific problems driving practices away from eClinicalWorks.

1. Arkenea – Custom EHR Development Solution

Best For: Practices requiring completely tailored solutions

When off-the-shelf EHR systems keep falling short of your expectations, custom development might be exactly what your practice needs. Arkenea specializes in building EHR systems from the ground up, designed specifically around how your practice actually operates rather than forcing you to adapt to someone else’s idea of healthcare workflow.

Why Consider Custom Development:

• Complete ownership and control over every feature and function
• Zero vendor lock-in situations or surprise pricing changes
• Seamless integration with your existing practice management tools
• Scalable architecture that grows alongside your practice
• HIPAA compliant security built into the foundation
• Ongoing development support as regulations and needs evolve

Custom EHR development eliminates the frustrations that come with trying to make generic software work for your specific specialty or workflow requirements. Arkenea is a custom EHR software development company with 14+ years of experience. Get in touch for a free consultation about your custom EHR development or integration project.

2. RXNT – Comprehensive Cloud-Based Solution

Best For: Small to medium practices seeking transparent pricing

RXNT consistently ranks as a top performer in user satisfaction surveys, earning high marks for its straightforward approach to healthcare software. The platform combines EHR, practice management, and billing in one integrated system without the complexity that plagues larger enterprise solutions.

Key Advantages:

• Transparent pricing structure starting around $300-400 per provider monthly
• ONC certified electronic health records with meaningful use compliance
• Integrated billing and practice management tools
• Strong pharmacy connectivity and e-prescribing capabilities
• Responsive customer support with actual healthcare industry experience
• Cloud-based architecture with reliable uptime performance

Important Considerations:

• May lack some advanced customization options needed by larger practices
• Limited specialty-specific templates compared to more established competitors
• Some users report occasional slowdowns during peak usage times

3. Tebra (Formerly Kareo) – Revenue-Focused Practice Management

Best For: Independent practices struggling with revenue optimization

Tebra has built a reputation for helping independent medical practices address the revenue leaks that often go unnoticed with other EHR systems. Their focus extends beyond basic electronic records to comprehensive practice growth and financial health.

Key Advantages:

• Integrated approach to reducing no-shows and improving patient engagement
• Strong analytics and reporting for practice performance monitoring
• Comprehensive billing and collections management tools
• Patient portal with appointment scheduling and payment processing
• Telehealth capabilities built into the core platform
• Dedicated account management for implementation and ongoing support

Important Considerations:

• Pricing tends toward the higher end at $400-500 per provider monthly
• Learning curve can be steep for practices transitioning from simpler systems
• Some advanced features require additional module purchases

4. Amazing Charts – Small Practice Specialist

Best For: Solo practitioners and small practices under 10 providers

Amazing Charts has carved out a strong niche serving smaller practices that need full EHR functionality without enterprise complexity. Their approach focuses on ease of use and quick implementation rather than extensive feature sets.

Key Advantages:

• Simplified interface designed for solo and small group practices
• Quick implementation timeline typically under 4 weeks
• Affordable pricing structure with predictable monthly costs
• Strong documentation tools with customizable templates
• Integrated e-prescribing and lab connectivity
• Local data storage options for practices preferring on-premise solutions

Important Considerations:

• Limited scalability for rapidly growing practices
• Fewer integration options compared to enterprise-level competitors
• May lack specialized modules needed by certain medical specialties

5. Elation EMR – User Experience Champion

Best For: Practices prioritizing ease of use and quick adoption

Elation EMR has gained substantial traction by focusing intensively on user experience design. Their platform requires minimal training and allows providers to start charting effectively within days rather than weeks or months.

Key Advantages:

• Intuitive interface that reduces training requirements significantly
• Fixed monthly pricing around $300-350 per provider with most features included
• Fast implementation process with minimal disruption to daily operations
• Clean, modern design that reduces screen fatigue during long charting sessions
• Strong outpatient focus with workflows optimized for office-based care
• Transparent pricing with no surprise fees for basic functionality

Important Considerations:

• Additional costs apply for advanced features like AI-powered scribing
• Limited hospital integration capabilities for practices requiring inpatient coordination
• Billing module requires separate subscription and setup

6. NextGen Healthcare – Customization Leader

Best For: Multi-provider practices requiring extensive workflow customization

NextGen Office stands out for its ability to adapt to virtually any practice workflow through extensive customization options. Recent improvements in customer support have addressed many of the historical complaints about the platform.

Key Advantages:

• Highly flexible templates and workflow configuration options
• Comprehensive specialty modules for various medical disciplines
• Strong practice management integration with financial reporting
• Improving customer support with faster response times
• Reliable cloud infrastructure with consistent uptime
• Robust patient portal and engagement tools

Important Considerations:

• Interface requires significant clicking through multiple menu levels
• Mid to upper tier pricing reflects the extensive feature set
• Implementation timeline can extend several months for complex customizations
• Some users report occasional login delays during peak times

7. Oracle Cerner – Enterprise Grade Usability

Best For: Larger practices wanting hospital-level capabilities with manageable complexity

Oracle Cerner has earned recognition for making enterprise-level EHR functionality more accessible than competitors like Epic. Many users appreciate the organized interface and logical workflow design.

Key Advantages:

• Well-organized interface with intuitive navigation patterns
• Excellent note-writing tools and documentation capabilities
• Strong lab integration and results management
• Stable performance with enterprise-level reliability
• Comprehensive reporting and analytics capabilities
• Better usability than most other hospital-grade systems

Important Considerations:

• Pricing reflects enterprise positioning and may exceed small practice budgets
• Some performance lag reported during heavy usage periods
• Implementation requires substantial training and workflow planning
• Certain functions still require multiple clicks to complete tasks

8. Athenahealth (athenaOne) – Comprehensive Integration

Best For: Practices wanting complete practice management integration despite complexity

AthenaOne provides one of the most comprehensive integrated platforms available, combining EHR, billing, practice management, and patient engagement tools in a single system. However, this comprehensiveness comes with significant complexity.

Key Advantages:

• Complete practice management suite with deep integration between modules
• Strong billing and revenue cycle management capabilities
• Extensive third-party integrations and marketplace apps
• Telehealth and patient portal functionality included
• Generally stable cloud platform with good uptime
• Comprehensive reporting and analytics across all practice functions

Important Considerations:

• Steep learning curve with complex implementation requirements
• Revenue-based pricing model can lead to escalating costs over time
• Customer support receives frequent complaints about responsiveness and billing disputes
• Interface complexity can overwhelm users seeking simpler solutions
• Many users report unexpected fee increases despite contractual agreements

9. DrChrono (EverHealth) – Mobile-First Design

Best For: Providers who prioritize mobile charting capabilities (proceed with caution)

DrChrono pioneered mobile EHR functionality and still maintains one of the better iOS applications in the healthcare software market. However, recent user experiences have raised significant concerns about overall platform reliability.

Key Advantages:

• Excellent mobile app particularly optimized for iPad and iPhone use
• Fast charting capabilities when the system functions properly
• Good basic scheduling and appointment management features
• Native mobile experience superior to most web-based competitors

Important Considerations:

• Widespread user complaints about customer support quality and responsiveness
• Frequent reports of system bugs, outages, and reliability issues
• Interface outside of mobile app described as outdated and difficult to navigate
• Many users strongly recommend avoiding the platform due to support issues
• Pricing may not justify the reliability concerns based on user feedback

10. Epic Cloud – Maximum Integration Power

Best For: Large health systems and practices requiring extensive integration capabilities

Epic represents the most comprehensive EHR solution available, with integration capabilities that surpass all competitors. However, its complexity and cost structure make it suitable primarily for large organizations.

Key Advantages:

• Unmatched integration capabilities across healthcare networks
• Comprehensive feature set covering every aspect of healthcare operations
• Strong analytics and population health management tools
• Robust enterprise-level support and training programs
• Market-leading interoperability with other healthcare systems
• Extensive third-party developer ecosystem

Important Considerations:

• Interface complexity that many users find overwhelming and counterintuitive
• Prohibitively expensive for most private practices and small groups
• Implementation timelines measured in months or years rather than weeks
• Requires extensive ongoing training for staff to use effectively
• Better suited for large health systems than independent practices

11. Practice Fusion/Allscripts – Budget-Conscious Option

Best For: Very small practices with basic EHR needs and limited budgets

Practice Fusion appeals to practices primarily through lower initial costs, though many of its historical advantages have diminished following its acquisition by Allscripts.

Key Advantages:

• Simplified interface suitable for basic charting and documentation
• Dot-phrase functionality that speeds common documentation tasks
• Lower entry costs compared to most full-featured competitors
• Suitable for cash-only practices with minimal insurance billing needs

Important Considerations:

• Extremely limited feature set that requires numerous clicks for routine tasks
• Frequent system outages and reliability issues reported by users
• Pricing has increased substantially while functionality remains basic
• Users describe the system as inadequate for anything beyond simple documentation
• Poor integration capabilities with other healthcare software

12. ModMed (Modernizing Medicine) – Specialty-Focused Excellence

Best For: Specialty practices requiring discipline-specific functionality

ModMed has built specialty-specific EHR solutions that understand the unique workflows and requirements of different medical disciplines, making it particularly valuable for practices that find generic EHRs inadequate.

Key Advantages:

• Specialty-specific interfaces designed for dermatology, orthopedics, and other disciplines
• Templates and workflows built around actual specialty practice patterns
• Strong mobile capabilities with touch-optimized interfaces
• Integrated practice analytics focused on specialty-specific metrics
• Photo documentation and imaging capabilities for visual specialties

Important Considerations:

• Limited applicability for multi-specialty practices or primary care
• Higher pricing tiers reflect the specialized development investment
• Smaller user base compared to general EHR platforms
• Integration challenges with non-specialty healthcare software

Why Practices Switch from eClinicalWorks

Understanding the specific problems driving practices away from eClinicalWorks helps explain why these alternatives have gained traction in the healthcare market. The most frequently cited issues include:

Performance and Reliability Concerns
Many practices report system slowdowns, unexpected downtime, and interface glitches that disrupt patient care and reduce productivity. These technical issues often worsen after software updates, creating ongoing operational challenges.

Hidden Costs and Billing Disputes
Users frequently discover additional charges for features they expected to be included in their contracts. Revenue-sharing models and percentage-based billing can lead to escalating costs as practices grow, making budgeting difficult.

Inadequate Customer Support
Practices report long wait times for technical support, frequent changes in account representatives, and difficulty resolving billing disputes. These support issues become particularly problematic during system outages or implementation challenges.

Interface Complexity and Training Requirements
The eClinicalWorks interface requires extensive training for staff to use effectively, and frequent updates often change familiar workflows without adequate preparation or documentation.

Choosing the Right eClinicalWorks Alternative

Selecting the best alternative depends on several practice-specific factors that should guide your evaluation process:

Practice Size Considerations
Small practices often benefit most from solutions like Elation EMR or Amazing Charts that prioritize ease of use and transparent pricing. Medium-sized practices typically find better value in customizable platforms like NextGen or RXNT that can accommodate growth. Large practices and health systems should focus on enterprise solutions like Oracle Cerner or Epic Cloud.

Budget and Pricing Structure Preferences
Consider whether you prefer fixed monthly costs (Elation, RXNT), revenue-sharing models (Athenahealth), or custom pricing (Arkenea, Epic). Factor in implementation costs, training expenses, and potential add-on fees when comparing total cost of ownership.

Specialty Requirements
General practices have the most options available, while specialty practices should prioritize solutions with relevant templates and workflows. ModMed excels for supported specialties, while custom development from Arkenea can address any specialty requirement.

Integration Needs
Evaluate your current software ecosystem and future integration requirements. Some practices need extensive hospital connectivity (Epic, Cerner), while others prioritize billing system integration (Athenahealth, Tebra) or lab connectivity (RXNT).

How to Switch from eClinicalWorks: Implementation Guide

Successfully transitioning away from eClinicalWorks requires careful planning and execution to minimize disruption to patient care and practice operations.

Phase 1: Evaluation and Selection (4-6 weeks)
Begin by documenting your current workflows, identifying specific problems with eClinicalWorks, and defining requirements for your new system. Request demonstrations from multiple vendors, focusing on how each addresses your identified pain points. Obtain detailed pricing information including implementation costs, training fees, and ongoing support charges.

Phase 2: Data Migration Planning (2-4 weeks)
Work with your chosen vendor to develop a comprehensive data migration strategy. This includes patient records, appointment histories, billing information, and any custom templates or forms you’ve created. Ensure your new system can import data in formats that preserve historical information and maintain continuity of care.

Phase 3: Staff Training and Preparation (3-6 weeks)
Schedule comprehensive training for all staff members who will use the new system. Many practices find it helpful to identify “super users” who receive advanced training and can support colleagues during the transition period. Plan for reduced productivity during the first few weeks as staff adapt to new workflows.

Phase 4: Go-Live and Optimization (2-8 weeks)
Execute the transition during a period of lower patient volume when possible. Maintain access to eClinicalWorks data during the initial weeks in case you need to reference historical information. Monitor system performance closely and work with your vendor to optimize workflows based on actual usage patterns.

Timeline Expectations
Most practices should plan for 3-4 months from initial evaluation to full implementation, though this varies significantly based on practice size and system complexity. Custom solutions may require 6-12 months for development and implementation.

Cost Considerations
Budget for implementation fees, data migration costs, additional hardware if needed, training expenses, and potential temporary productivity losses. Many practices find the total cost of switching ranges from $10,000-50,000 depending on practice size and chosen solution.

Feature Comparison: Top eClinicalWorks Alternatives

Alternative	Monthly Cost Range	Best For	Implementation Time	Key Strength
Arkenea Custom	Custom Quote	Unique Requirements	3-6 months	Complete Customization
RXNT	$300-400/provider	Small-Medium Practices	2-4 weeks	Transparent Pricing
Tebra	$400-500/provider	Revenue Optimization	4-6 weeks	Practice Growth Focus
Amazing Charts	$200-300/provider	Solo/Small Practices	2-3 weeks	Simplicity
Elation EMR	$300-350/provider	User Experience	1-2 weeks	Ease of Use
NextGen	$400-600/provider	Customization Needs	6-12 weeks	Workflow Flexibility
Oracle Cerner	Enterprise Pricing	Large Practices	3-6 months	Enterprise Integration
Athenahealth	Revenue % Based	Comprehensive Needs	8-12 weeks	All-in-One Platform

Frequently Asked Questions About eClinicalWorks Alternatives

What are the main problems with eClinicalWorks that drive practices to switch?

The primary issues include system reliability problems, hidden costs that appear after implementation, poor customer support with frequent account representative changes, and interface complexity that requires extensive training. Many practices also report billing disputes and unexpected fee increases that make budgeting difficult.

How much does it typically cost to switch from eClinicalWorks to another EHR?

Total switching costs typically range from $10,000 to $50,000 for most practices, including implementation fees, data migration, training, and temporary productivity losses. The exact cost depends on practice size, chosen alternative, and complexity of data migration requirements. Factor in 2-4 months of potentially reduced productivity during the transition.

What’s the best eClinicalWorks alternative for small practices under 5 providers?

Small practices often find the most value in Elation EMR for its ease of use, Amazing Charts for simplicity, or RXNT for comprehensive features with transparent pricing. Custom development from Arkenea may also be cost-effective for practices with very specific workflow requirements that off-the-shelf solutions cannot accommodate.

How long does EHR migration typically take and what’s involved?

Most EHR migrations require 3-4 months from selection to full implementation. The process involves data extraction from eClinicalWorks, staff training on the new system, workflow optimization, and gradual transition of daily operations. Expect 2-4 weeks of reduced productivity as staff adapt to new processes.

Which eClinicalWorks alternatives offer the best customer support?

RXNT and Elation EMR consistently receive high marks for customer support responsiveness and healthcare industry expertise. NextGen has reportedly improved their support quality significantly. Avoid DrChrono based on widespread user complaints about support quality. Custom solutions from companies like Arkenea typically offer more personalized support relationships.

What integration capabilities should I look for in an eClinicalWorks alternative?

Priority integrations include lab connectivity for receiving results electronically, pharmacy systems for e-prescribing, billing software for claims processing, and patient portal functionality. Larger practices may need hospital system connectivity, while specialty practices should prioritize equipment integrations relevant to their discipline.

Can I keep my patient data when switching from eClinicalWorks?

Yes, healthcare regulations require that you maintain access to patient records regardless of EHR system changes. Most alternatives can import patient data from eClinicalWorks, though the completeness and formatting may vary. Work with your new vendor to ensure historical data remains accessible and properly formatted in your new system.

Are cloud-based alternatives more reliable than eClinicalWorks?

Most modern cloud-based EHR systems offer better uptime and reliability than what many practices experience with eClinicalWorks. However, reliability varies significantly between vendors. Research uptime statistics and read user reviews focusing on system stability before making your selection.

What happens to my eClinicalWorks contract when I switch?

Review your eClinicalWorks contract carefully for termination clauses, notice requirements, and potential penalties. Some contracts include automatic renewal terms or early termination fees. You may need to provide 30-90 days notice before canceling service. Consult with legal counsel if contract terms are unclear.

Should I consider custom EHR development instead of another off-the-shelf system?

Custom development makes sense for practices with unique workflows that existing systems cannot accommodate, those who have been disappointed by multiple off-the-shelf solutions, or practices that want complete control over their software evolution. While initial development costs may be higher, custom solutions eliminate vendor lock-in and can provide better long-term value for practices with specific requirements.

Making Your Final Decision

The journey away from eClinicalWorks represents an opportunity to find an EHR solution that truly supports your practice goals rather than creating additional obstacles. Each alternative on this list addresses different aspects of the problems that drive practices to seek change.

For practices seeking the ultimate in customization and control, Arkenea’s custom development approach eliminates the compromises inherent in off-the-shelf software. Smaller practices often find happiness with user-friendly solutions like Elation EMR or Amazing Charts. Growing practices typically benefit from the flexibility offered by NextGen or the comprehensive approach of Tebra.

The key to success lies in honest assessment of your practice’s specific needs, realistic evaluation of implementation timelines and costs, and commitment to the change management process required for any EHR transition. Take advantage of demonstration periods and pilot programs when available, and don’t hesitate to ask detailed questions about pricing, support, and long-term product development plans.

Remember that switching EHR systems represents a significant investment of time, money, and effort. Choose a solution that addresses your current pain points while positioning your practice for future growth and success. The right EHR should enhance your ability to deliver quality patient care rather than creating additional administrative burdens.