Free Hospital EMR and EHR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to Hospital EMR and EHR for FREE!

Survey Data on the Healthcare IT Job Market

Posted on March 24, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’ve been working for a number of years with Pivot Point Consulting, a Vaco Company (previously known as Greythorn) on their Health IT Market Report that looks at the Healthcare IT career space. This year they decided to do a trends edition that took this year’s survey results and compared it with historical data from the past three years which added a new layer of insight to the report.

While at the HIMSS conference, I had a chance to sit down with Ben Weber, Managing Partner, Pivot Point Consulting, a Vaco Company, to talk about their Health IT Market Report and the insights that were gleaned from their survey.

You can find my full video interview with Ben Weber at the bottom of this post or click on any of the links below to skip to a specific topic we discussed:

Be sure to download the full 2017 Healthcare IT Market Report: Trends Edition to dive into the responses to all the questions on the survey. Let us know in the comments what survey results stand out to you.

If you’re searching for a healthcare IT job, be sure to check out the jobs that Pivot Point Consulting has posted on Healthcare IT Central.

Who’s Over MACRA? CIO? COO?

Posted on March 22, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

In no surprising way, MACRA is a major topic in pretty much every hospital and health system in the US. There’s a lot of money to be had or lost with MACRA. This is especially true for health systems with a lot of providers. Plus, it sets the foundation for the future as well. I believe MACRA will be as impactful as meaningful use, but without as many incentive payments (chew on that idea for a minute).

As I’ve talked to hundreds of organizations about MACRA, I’ve seen a whole array of responses for how they’re addressing MACRA and who is in charge. Is this a CIO responsibility since MACRA certainly requires EHR and other technology? Is this a COO job because MACRA is more of an operations problem than it is a technical problem? Some might make the case for the CMO/CMIO to be in charge since MACRA requires so much involvement from your providers.

From my experience, the decision usually comes down to choosing between the CIO and the COO, but with input and buy-in from the CMO/CMIO. How the CIO positions themselves will determine if they are over MACRA or not. Some CIOs see themselves as tech people and so they shy away from touching MACRA. Other CIOs see themselves as integral part of their business success and so they want to have MACRA under their purview. Most progressive CIOs that I talk to want the later.

I’m an advocate for a CIO that’s involved in the business side of things. Those CIOs that don’t want this duty are going to miss out on strategic opportunities for their organization. I heard one CIO describe that they viewed their IT organization as Information As A Service provider. Their job as the IT department was just to provide the information from the IT systems to someone else who would deal with the information, the MACRA regulations, etc.

The Information as a Service provider concept has issues on multiple levels. The most important is that if you’re just an information provider, then you lose out on the opportunity to be a strategic part of your organization. However, from a more practical MACRA level, it’s really challenging to provide the right information for MACRA when you’re just an information provider and know little about the regulation. We all know how quickly communication can break down when the person needing the information is disconnected from the people who provide the information and they’re disconnected from the people entering the information.

No doubt a healthcare CIO has to be careful what projects they add to their plate. However, I don’t think MACRA is one of those projects that should be pushed off to someone else. Certainly there can be specific organization cultures where it makes sense for the COO to run things, but I think that should be pretty rare.

How are you approaching MACRA at your organization? Who’s over it? I look forward to hearing your experiences in the comments.

Emergency Department Information Systems Market Fueled By Growing Patient Flow

Posted on March 20, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

A new research report has concluded that the size of the emergency department information systems market is expanding, driven by increasing patient flows. This dovetails with a report focused on 2016 data which also sees EDIS upgrades underway, though it points out that some hospital buyers don’t have the management support or a large enough budget to support the upgrade.

The more recent report, by Transparency Market Research, notes that ED traffic is being boosted by increases in the geriatric population, an increasing rate of accidents and overall population growth. In part to cope with this increase in patient flow, emergency departments are beginning to choose specialized, best-of-breed EDISs rather than less-differentiated electronic medical records systems, Transparency concludes.

Its analysis is supported by Black Book Research, whose 2016 report found that 69% of hospitals upgrading their existing EDIS are moving from enterprise EMR emergency models to freestanding platforms. Meanwhile, growing spending on healthcare and healthcare infrastructure is making the funds available to purchase EDIS platforms.

These factors are helping to fuel the emergence of robust EDIS market growth, according to Black Book. Its 2016 research, predicted that 35% of hospitals over 150 beds would replace their EDIS that year. Spurred by this spending, the US EDIS market should hit $420M, Black Book projects.

The most-popular EDIS features identified by Black Book include ease of use, reporting improvements, interoperability, physician productivity improvements, diagnosis enhancements and patient satisfaction, its research concluded.

All that being said, not all hospital leaders are well-informed about EDIS implementation and usability, which is holding growth back in some sectors. Also, high costs pose a barrier to adoption of these systems, according to Transparency.

Not only that, some hospital leaders don’t feel that it’s necessary to invest in an EDIS in addition to their enterprise EMR,. Black Book found. Thirty-nine percent of respondents to the 2016 study said that they were moderately or highly dissatisfied with their current EDIS, but 90% of the dissatisfied said they were being forced to rely on generic hospital-wide EMRs.

While all of this is interesting, it’s worth noting that EDIS investment is far from the biggest concern for hospital IT departments. According to a HIMSS survey on 2017 hospitals’ IT plans, top investment priorities include pharmacy technologies and EMR components.

Still, it appears that considering EDIS enhancements may be worth the trouble. For example, seventy-six percent of Black Book respondents implementing a replacement EDIS in Q2 2014 to Q1 2015 saw improved customer service outcomes attributed to the platform.

Also, 44% of hospitals over 200 beds implementing a replacement EDIS over the same period said that it reduced visit costs between 4% and 12%, the research firm found.

Against Medical Advice – ZDoggMD’s New Show

Posted on March 17, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

For those of you reading this that don’t know ZDoggMD, what’s wrong with you? Seriously though, check out some ZDoggMD’s parody videos to see what I mean. Along with making “dope parody videos”, he has just started live streaming a new show he called Against Medical Advice which he streams live each week on the ZDoggMD Facebook page.

Check out the trailer for Against Medical Advice:

I love the goals that ZDoggMD has for the show and he’s such a unique talent so check it out. Against Medical Advice episode 1 and episode 2 are out if you want to see something you’ve never seen in healthcare.

If you’re not a fan of his new show, you’ll probably enjoy this heartfelt parody of 7 Years (A Life in Medicine). It’s a good reminder of the importance of the work we’re doing in healthcare.

Hospital App Helps Patients After Surgery

Posted on March 15, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

Patients are very vulnerable after surgery. If they don’t follow post-surgical instructions, they may be readmitted (never a good thing for hospitals these days), and far worse, may suffer real harm.

Unfortunately, many patients don’t retain or follow doctors’ instructions on how to best recover from surgery, particularly if these instructions aren’t documented well.  For example, a 2015 study appearing in Anesthesiology concluded that only 60% of 519 surgery patients who got verbal post-operative instructions or annotated EMR records complied with medication instructions.

In an effort to improve stats like these, Chicago’s Rush University Medical Center has introduced an app designed to support patients in their post-surgical recovery process. The app, SeamlessMD, prompts patients to ask for reminders about their surgeon’s instructions, according to a HIMSS Future Care article.

Anthony Perry, MD, vice president for ambulatory care and population health at Rush, told the publication that his facility had already implemented protocols for enhanced recovery after surgery before the app was created. But the app has potential to move patients’ post-surgical recovery to the next level, Perry said. “It’s not only a neat technology, but a neat technology that’s truly aligned with our own goals,” he noted.

Dr. Perry believes that presenting prompts and reminders via a personal mobile device offers benefits traditional care instructions can’t, particularly when the app is placed on a patient’s phone. “There’s a bridge that a smartphone gives us into a person’s everyday life that we don’t have when they come visit us in the office,” he said.

Rush’s initiative comes as hospitals around the world consider the benefits of rolling out patient-oriented apps. For example, four National Health Services hospitals serving the United Kingdom are testing apps that monitor patient health at home.

The hospitals are testing two apps, one focused on managing gestational diabetes treatment and the other addressing COPD monitoring and care. (As one might expect, the diabetes app collects blood glucose readings and the COPD app oxygen saturation levels.) The pilot, which is still in its initial stages, has already seen some success. For example, the number of office visits by patients with gestational diabetes has fallen 25% since the app was released to such patients.

This may be the dawn of a new age for hospital use of mHealth apps, which has been at best at a trial-and-error stage for several years. While most hospitals and health systems have toyed with apps to some degree, in the past there was neither a clinical nor technical approach for them to adopt. So many initial app projects went nowhere.

But with evidence piling up that at least some approaches work – such as remote patient monitoring for chronic disease management, as described above – hospitals are beginning to see apps as a practical tool for improving outcomes. Meanwhile, as they’ve adopted mobile-friendly infrastructures, hospitals have become more capable of supporting hospital-developed apps effectively.

Of course, there’s probably a number of functions apps can perform which nobody’s pursued just yet. But with some early successes in place, my guess is that hospitals will try lots of new app projects going forward.

ACOs Not Scaling Well, But Health IT Helps

Posted on March 13, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

ACOs were billed as the next big thing in healthcare, a model which would create economies of scale and tame rising costs of care. In theory, unifying hospitals and doctors into an overarching entity – and creating shared clinical and financial goals – should improve care and boost efficiency.

Of course, creating them doesn’t come cheap. In fact, creating even a modest ACO typically calls for between $1 million and $3 million in capital investment, according to Michael Deegan, MD, who recently developed a course on ACOs for the University of Texas at Dallas. It also takes 18 to 24 months to launch an ACO, Deegan told an interviewer at UT.

But once all of the Ts have been crossed and the Is dotted, ACOs can meet their stated goals, right? Actually, not so much, though health IT can help things along, according to Indranil Bardham, a colleague of Deegan’s at UT Dallas who serves as professor of information systems.

According to an article in HealthcareITNews, Bardhan recently completed a study on ACO performance which concluded that health IT had a measurable impact on their efficiency. The study, which drew on 2013-2015 data from CMS, reviewed the performance of 400 ACOs.

Among the key takeways Bardhan took from his research was that the larger an ACO was, the more likely it was to be inefficient. This flies in the face of conventional wisdom, which would suggest that bigger is better when it comes to improving efficiency.

On the other hand, health IT use had the effect its champions might hope for, though modest in scope. The study concluded that a 1 percent increase in HIT usage was associated with an 0.5 percent increase in ACO efficiency.

The thing is, these measures represent just a couple of ways to evaluate ACO performance, making it hard to tell just what is working, Bardhan told HIN. “Healthcare, with respect to ACOs, is fascinating because there is not just one single output measure that you are using to compare performance,” he told the magazine’s Bill Siwicki. “…It is difficult to measure the performance of organizations against each other when you have multiple outputs that cannot easily be transformed into a single dollar number.”

This squares with commentary by other ACO researchers, who seem to agree that the whole ACO evaluation process is a bit mysterious. As health policy analyst David Introcaso notes, in a review of ACO-based Medicare Shared Savings Program, CMS isn’t helping either. “While CMS details financial and quality performance results, the agency does not explain, at least publicly, how results, favorable or unfavorable, were achieved.”

Without knowing more about what we should measure, and why – much less what steps helped in achieving their results – it’s too soon to tell what type of health IT should be deployed in ACOs. But looked at more optimistically, once we have a better idea of what ACO success factors are, it seems likely that health IT tools will help execs address them. (For a look at one completely health IT-based ACO concept, see this piece on the Virtual ACO.)

The B2B Vendors are Coming! The B2B Vendors are Coming!

Posted on March 10, 2017 I Written By

Colin Hung is the co-founder of the #hcldr (healthcare leadership) tweetchat one of the most popular and active healthcare social media communities on Twitter. Colin is a true believer in #HealthIT, social media and empowered patients. Colin speaks, tweets and blogs regularly about healthcare, technology, marketing and leadership. He currently leads the marketing efforts for @PatientPrompt, a Stericycle product. Colin’s Twitter handle is: @Colin_Hung

It’s been a couple of weeks since the annual HIMSS conference wrapped up for 2017 and I’m just starting to emerge from the HIMSS-Haze of sleep deprivation. I doff my hat to those that recovered more quickly.

As usual there was too much to take in at HIMSS17. The keynotes were fantastic, the sessions educational and the exhibit hall had a buzz about it that was absent from last year’s event. Although the main take-away from HIMSS17 seems to be the emergence of Artificial Intelligence, I believe something else emerged from the event – something that may have far greater ramifications for HealthIT in the short term.

For me the big story at HIMSS17 was the arrival of mainstream IT companies. I have been going to HIMSS for 10 years now and I can honestly say this year was the first time that non-traditional healthcare IT vendors were a noticeable force. SAP, IBM (Watson), Intel, Google, Salesforce, Samsung and Microsoft were just a few of the B2B vendors who had large booths in the HIMSS17 exhibit hall.

Salesforce was particularly noteworthy. They made a big splash with their super-sized booth this year. It was easily five times the size of the one they had at HIMSS16 and featured a fun “cloud viewer” at its center along with a large theatre for demonstrations.

Salesforce, however, didn’t stop there. They also threw a HUGE party over at Pointe Orlando on Tuesday night. At one point, the party had a line of eager attendees that snaked out the front of the facility. Their party rivaled that of several large EHR vendors.

IBM was also back at HIMSS after an extended absence. Their “organic booth” was always busy with people curious to learn more about IBM Watson – particularly after the keynote given by CEO Ginni Rometty on Day 1.

So what does the arrival of mainstream B2B vendors mean for healthcare?

Consolidation. The EHR gold rush is over and yet companies like SAP and Salesforce are still electing to invest in healthcare. Why would they do that at a time when government incentive money has all but dried up? I believe it’s because they smell consolidation and optimization opportunities. These B2B players have large war chests and as HealthIT companies begin to struggle, they will be knights in shining armor waiting to swoop in.

More Consumer Technologies. One of the big trends in healthcare right now is consumerism. There is a drive by healthcare organizations to adopt consumer-centric technologies and workflows to service patients better. Patients are seeking providers that offer the conveniences that they are used to as consumers: online appointment booking, mobile chat, real-time price quotes, etc. Companies like Google, Samsung, IBM and Microsoft already have technologies that work well in the consumer world. With growing demand in healthcare it’s only natural that they are investing.

Standards. Maybe I’m just being optimistic, but when companies like TSYS (a very large financial transaction processor) show up at HIMSS for the first time, one can only hope that standards and interoperability will soon follow. After all, if cut-throat banks can agree on a common way to share information with each other, surely the same can happen in healthcare.

Cognitive Computing. Google, IBM, Microsoft and Intel have all made big bets on cognitive computing. I’m willing to bet that their investments in this area dwarf anything that a HealthIT company has made – including Epic and Cerner. IBM and Microsoft in particular have been aggressively seeking partners to work with them on health applications for Artificial Intelligence. Just ahead of HIMSS17, Microsoft and UPMC Enterprises announced that they would be working together to “create new products aimed at transforming care delivery”.

I’m very excited by the arrival of these B2B technology vendors. I think it signals the start of a maturation phase in the HealthIT industry, one in which consolidation and collaboration break down legacy silos. At the very least, traditional HealthIT companies like Cerner, Epic, athenahealth and NextGen will now have to step up their game in order to fend off these large, well-funded entrants.

Exciting times!

The Challenge of Managing So Many Vendors

Posted on March 8, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

The more I talk to CIOs, the more I realize that CIO at a hospital and health system is as much about vendor management as it is anything else. And quite frankly, those CIOs are tired and overwhelmed by all the vendor management they do. Every CIO I’ve met is looking to decrease the number of vendors they’re working with and not increase it.

In some ways it makes sense. Even if you look at the basic IT commodity items like servers, systems, storage, networking, security, single sign on, etc you’re probably looking at 14-16 vendors for most organizations. This doesn’t include all the higher end clinical systems (including the EHR) and all of the shadow IT systems that have seeped their way into departments thanks to easy to purchase and use cloud solutions.

At the higher end, I’ve heard of some health systems having 300 different systems that they had to manage. It’s a much smaller number at the lower end small, rural hospital, but it’s still a huge task for even them since they outsource almost everything. They usually can’t attract or afford long term staff to the rural hospitals.

Is it any wonder why that hospital CIO told me that “we’ve got what we need”?

I wonder if the real undercurrent of his comment was “I don’t want any more vendors to manage. I have more than enough!”

My guess is that this CIO who has “all the IT he needs” would probably have no problem looking at and implementing new features and functionality from their existing vendor. That’s a huge advantage for existing vendors as they continue to grow a bigger footprint in the hospitals where they have customers. However, are they missing out on a lot of innovations because of this approach?

At the end of the day, a CIO has to be an effective vendor manager. The better they do at this job, the better their organization will perform.

Will How Well You Document Determine Your Quality Ranking?

Posted on March 6, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

We all know that the best doctors in the world are determined by how well that doctor documents the visit.
-Said No Doctor Ever!

Seriously, it’s an absurd claim that the quality of a doctor’s documentation would be how we rank the quality of a doctor. I’m sure just reading the headline probably pissed you off. I was upset just typing it. We all know that there are a lot of great doctors who are really awful at documenting. We know there are some awful doctors that’s documentation looks beautiful.

Since we all know this is the case why would I ask the absurd question about a doctor’s documentation determining their quality rating? Because I can see a path where we head this direction.

Yes, it’s scary to consider, but that’s why it’s so important that we consider it. I think this could be the impact of the quality reporting scores that come from MACRA/MIPS/APMs. It seems like it’s only just a matter of time before these scores will hit the Physician Compare website.

Don’t be surprised if they’re also made publicly available so that every health rating site on the internet pulls them down from CMS and uses them as one more factor in how they determine the highest quality doctors. If you don’t believe this will happen, then you haven’t followed what they’ve done with other CMS data.

Remember that these websites don’t have to have actual quality data. They just have to show the perception of quality data. Most consumers aren’t smart enough (or diligent enough) to know the difference. In fact, CMS itself calls it quality data, so they’ll be able to use that word freely. Imagine the doctor who gets ranked lower because their MIPS quality score was lower or non-existent because they have a small Medicare population or because they chose not to participate in the program. This is not a far fetched idea and is a fear I’ve heard from many health systems.

It’s too bad we don’t have a real way to measure quality. Then, we’d all want that data to be shared. However, I’m close to the conclusion that you can’t truly measure clinical quality. At least not in any scalable way. I’m hoping one day we’ll get there, but I don’t see it happening anytime soon. Until then, companies will use whatever perception of quality they can find and many high quality doctors will suffer because of it.

EMR Add-Ons On The Way

Posted on March 3, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare editor and analyst with 25 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. She can be reached at @ziegerhealth or www.ziegerhealthcare.com.

A new study backed by speech recognition software vendor Nuance Communications has concluded that many healthcare leaders are planning to add new technologies to supplement their EMRs, Popular add-ons cited by the study include (naturally) speech recognition, mobility options and computer-assisted physician documentation tools. While the results are partially a pitch for Nuance, of course, they also highlight the tension between spending on clinical improvement and satisfaction and boosting the bottom line with better documentation tech.

The study, which was conducted by HIMSS Analytics, was designed to look at ways to optimize EMRs and opportunities to improve care at hospitals and health systems. Conducted between August 17 and September 6 of last year, it draws on 167 respondents from 142 different healthcare organizations. Forty percent of respondents hold C-suite titles, and an additional 40% were in IT leadership. (It would be interesting to see how the two groups’ perceptions vary, but the study summary doesn’t provide that information.)

According to HIMSS, 83% of respondents reported having confidence that their organization would eventually realize their full potential, particularly improving care coordination and outcomes.

To this end, 75% of respondents said they’d boosted their EMR efforts with training and support resources, while two-thirds have increased staff in at least one IT area since implementing their system. Respondents apparently didn’t say how much they’d increased their budget, if at all, to meet these needs – and you have to wonder how these organizations are paying for these efforts, and how much. But the report didn’t provide such information.

To increase clinician satisfaction with EMR use, 82% of respondents said providing clinician training and education, 75% are enhancing existing technology and tools and 68% adopting new technology and tools. To read between the lines once again, it’s worth noting that hospitals and health systems seem to be putting a stronger emphasis on training than new tech, which somewhat contradicts the study’s conclusions. Still, EMR add-ons clearly matter.

Meanwhile, about one-quarter of survey respondents said that they planned to introduce EMR-enhancing tools at the point of care, primarily to improve documentation and boost physician satisfaction. Those included mobility tools (44%), computer-assisted physician documentation (38%) and speech recognition (25%). These numbers seem a bit lower than I would have expected, particularly the mobile stat. I’m betting that establishing mobile security is still a tough nut to crack for most.

While increasing clinician satisfaction and improving care outcomes is important, boosting financial performance clearly matters too, and respondents said that improving documentation was central to doing so. Fifty-four percent said that better documentation would reduce the number of denied claims they face, 52% expect to improve performance under bundled payments, 38% predicted reduced readmissions and 38% thought documentation improvements would better physician time management and improve patient flow.

Again, I doubt that C-suite execs and IT leaders will pay equal attention to tools which improve their finances and those which meet “softer” goals – and financial goals have to take priority. But these stats do suggest that hospitals and health systems are giving EMR add-ons some attention. It will be interesting to see if they’re willing to invest in EMR enhancements — rather than burrowing deeper into their existing EMR tech — over the next year or two.