Is Leaving the MBYS You’ve Used for Years Really Risky?

Leaving your current MBYS (clinic management software) does not mean giving up your patient history or relearning everything; what matters is how the transition is planned. Hesitation is still natural: a physician who has worked on the same screen for years knows exactly where every patient’s file sits, and that order feels reassuring. But being used to something does not make it easy or right for you. In this post, we take the concerns about incomplete data transfer, disruption to the clinic, and starting over one by one, and explain which are real costs and which are risks the right process can reduce.

“All my data is there. How can I leave?”

We hear this from physicians often:

“My clinic has an MBYS I’ve used for years, one I’m used to and where all my patient data is stored. Leaving it for another system feels difficult and risky.”

The concern comes from a fair place: in an observational study of 57 physicians in the US, 49.2% of working time was spent on electronic health records and desk work¹. The records built up over the years live inside that screen. But when we break the concern down, we find three distinct worries packed into a single sentence.

Fear of data loss

One of physicians’ biggest hesitations when switching software is losing patient records accumulated over years. Yet Türkiye’s Regulation on Health Information Management Systems sets clear obligations here. Articles 5 and 14 of the regulation require the previous provider, when software is changed or service ends, to hand over patient records and database backups in line with defined standards³.

There are two separate issues: receiving the data from the old provider, and transferring it completely into the new system. The first is governed by regulation; the second depends on the new software’s technical compatibility and its migration process. So the real question during a switch is not “Can I get my records?” but “Can my past patient records be moved into the new system completely and securely?”

Fear of disruption

Even one day of disruption is a real cost for a clinic; appointments, visits, and prescriptions do not wait. That is why, in a well-planned transition, data migration and system checks are scheduled to disrupt patient intake as little as possible. When access to the old system ends is also part of the transition plan. The real question is not when to move to the new system, but how to make the move without disrupting daily operations.

Fear of changing habits

Of the three concerns, this is the least discussed and perhaps the most decisive. A physician who has worked on the same screen for years knows every shortcut and every menu. Moving to a new system means leaving those habits behind. But being used to something does not make it easy or right for you. Over time, the slowness and unnecessary steps of the current system can become a natural part of the daily routine. The real question is not how long it takes to get used to a new system, but how much time current habits cost you every day.

“Aren’t add-on tools easier?”

At first glance, they can seem that way. A tool that runs alongside your current MBYS can simplify certain tasks without requiring a move to a new system. The physician keeps using familiar software while benefiting from new features.

In daily practice, though, what matters is not only the speed of a single task but how information connects. Visit notes, patient history, tests, prescriptions, and follow-up form a whole. Running these tasks across different tools can, depending on the depth of integration, require extra checks, screen switching, and repeated data entry.

Another important issue is data security and reliability. When patient information is processed across different systems and third-party providers, it matters where the data is stored, who can access it, and for what purposes it is used. Transferring health data abroad is subject to specific legal conditions and safeguards under KVKK, Türkiye’s personal data protection law, and the Health Information Management Systems Regulation places further limits on the environments where health data may be recorded and stored^{2, 3}. Manual data transfers can also make it harder to trace how information moves between systems. These points apply not only to add-on solutions but to integrated systems as well.

The real question is not how easy it is to add a new tool, but how integrated clinical operations are and how well patient data is protected and traceable across systems.

How are these three questions answered in practice?

The three concerns that come up when switching software map to three key points to watch during the transition.

Are my records transferred completely?

The transition starts with retrieving patient records and database backups from the current system; the Health Information Management Systems Regulation sets out your current provider’s obligations for this handover³. In a well-planned transition, the new provider moves the data into supported formats and verifies it together with the physician: patient and visit counts are compared, records are matched, and sample patient files are checked. Data that falls outside the VEM standard (the regulation’s data transfer model) may need additional work; a good transition plan says so up front.

Does the transition disrupt daily operations?

The new provider plans data migration and system checks to disrupt patient intake as little as possible. Before the system goes live, core tasks such as appointments, visit records, and prescriptions are verified; how access to old records will continue is also part of the plan. The transition is then treated less as a technical software change and more as a process aimed at protecting the clinic’s daily operations.

How long does it take to get used to a new system?

The answer depends on how the new system works. With a conventional MBYS, getting used to it can mean learning new menus, forms, and screen layouts. That time is real, and physicians’ hesitation is understandable.

Agent-based systems like Dr.Medkit take a different approach. The physician carries on with the visit as usual while the system organizes the information that comes up during it. It also aims to manage clinical and operational tasks such as appointments, tests, prescriptions, and patient follow-up from the same workspace. The physician can direct these tasks with natural commands, then review the prepared records and suggested actions and give final approval. Getting used to the system then becomes less about learning a new program’s menus and steps and more about doing the work you already do in a different way.

What does KVKK say about this transition?

In short: protecting patient data is the responsibility of the software provider as well as the physician.

Under Personal Data Protection Law No. 6698 (KVKK), health data is a special category of personal data. In independent practices, the physician is usually the data controller and the software provider the data processor. That distinction does not mean the physician alone is responsible for data security. Article 12 of the law sets out the joint responsibility of the data controller and the data processor for taking the necessary security measures².

The Health Information Management Systems Regulation places additional obligations on software providers. Articles 16 and 17 require health data to be stored in secure environments, protected against unauthorized access, and accompanied by logs that allow system operations to be reviewed retrospectively³.

These obligations also apply during a software change. Where the data is stored, how it is protected in transit, who can access it, and whether operations are logged should all be assessed. While the physician, as data controller, carries out the necessary oversight, the software provider must also meet its own security obligations. So what matters in a transition is not only that the data is transferred completely, but that the process is run securely and traceably.

The technical and legal requirements for protecting health data are a broad topic that deserves a discussion of its own.

Key takeaways

• How the transition is planned matters more than the switch itself. With the right process, the risks of data loss and disruption can be significantly reduced.
• The Health Information Management Systems Regulation sets out the current provider’s obligation to hand over patient records and database backups. The real issue is moving that data into the new system completely and securely.
• Being used to a system does not make it the most efficient option. The effect of current habits on the daily workload should also be weighed.
• Beyond the convenience add-on tools offer, it matters how far they integrate clinical processes and how patient data is managed across systems.
• Data security is the responsibility of the software provider as well as the physician. Protecting data and keeping operations traceable should not be overlooked during the transition.

References

1. 1Sinsky C, Colligan L, Li L, et al. Allocation of Physician Time in Ambulatory Practice: A Time and Motion Study in 4 Specialties. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2016;165(11):753–760. DOI: 10.7326/M16-0961. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27595430/
2. 26698 Sayılı Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Kanunu (Personal Data Protection Law No. 6698). Official Gazette (Resmî Gazete), 7 April 2016, No. 29677. Relevant provisions: Article 3 (definitions), 6 (special categories of data), 9 (transfer abroad), 12 (data security). Current text: https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.6698.pdf; KVKK guidance on Article 9: https://www.kvkk.gov.tr/Icerik/2053/Yurtdisina-Aktarim
3. 3Sağlık Bilgi Yönetim Sistemleri Hakkında Yönetmelik (Regulation on Health Information Management Systems). Official Gazette (Resmî Gazete), 25 August 2022, No. 31934; amended 3 July 2026, No. 33299. Relevant provisions: Article 5/1-ç and 5/1-d (data handover), Article 14 (VEM and data transfer), Article 16 (confidentiality and data storage), Article 17 (event and audit logs). Ministry of Health: https://sbsgm.saglik.gov.tr/TR-92107/saglik-bilgi-yonetim-sistemleri-hakkinda-yonetmelik.html; Current text: https://mevzuat.wiki/saglik-bilgi-yonetim-sistemleri-hakkinda-yonetmelik