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!

RNs are Choosing Where to Work Based on Hospital EHR

Posted on February 27, 2015 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 came across this tweet and it made me stop and realize how important the selection and more important the implementation of your EHR will be for your organization. In many areas there’s already a nurse shortage, so it would become even more of an issue if your hospital comes to be known as the hospital with the cumbersome EHR.

Here’s some insight into the survey results from the article linked above:

79% of job seeking registered nurses reported that the reputation of the hospital’s EHR system is a top three consideration in their choice of where they will work. Nurses in the 22 largest metropolitan statistical areas are most satisfied with the usability of Cerner, McKesson, NextGen and Epic Systems. Those EHRs receiving the lowest satisfaction scores by nurses include Meditech, Allscripts, eClinicalWorks and HCare.

The article did also quote someone as saying that a well done EHR implementation can be a recruiting benefit. So, like most things it’s a double edge sword. A great EHR can be a benefit to you when recruiting nurses to your organization, but a poorly done, complex EHR could drive nurses away.

I’m pretty sure this side affect wasn’t discussed when evaluating how to implement the EHR and what kind of resources to commit to ensuring a successful and well done EHR implementation. They’re paying the price now.

Department of Defense (DOD) and Open Source EHR

Posted on February 25, 2015 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 was intrigued by a report by the Center for New American Security that was covered in this article on HealthcareDive. In the report, they make a good case for why the Department of Defense (DOD) should select an open source EHR solution as opposed to a commercial solution. Here’s an excerpt from the article:

“I think the commercial systems are very good at what they do,” Ondra said. However, “they are not ideally designed for efficiency and enhancement of care delivery, and I think the DOD can do better with an open source system both in the near-term, and more importantly in the long-term, because of the type of innovation and creativity that can more quickly come into these systems.”

Reports like this make a pretty good case for open source. Plus, I love that it also pointed out that commercial EHR vendors were built on the back of the fee for service model which doesn’t matter to the DOD. It was also interesting to think about the DOD’s selection of an open source EHR system as an investment in other hospitals since the money they spend on an open source EHR could help to catalyze the ongoing development of a free open source EHR solution.

While these arguments make a lot of sense, it seems that the DOD has decided not to go with an open source EHR solution and instead is opting for a commercial alternative. In this article (Thanks Paul) the DOD has narrowed the list of contenders for the $11 Billion DOD EHR contract (DHMSM) to just: CSC/HP/Allscripts, Leidos/Accenture/Cerner, and IBM/Epic who “fall within the competitive range.” They reported that PwC/Google/GDIT/DSS/Medsphere and Intersystems did not fall within the competitive range.

I’ll be interested to hear Medsphere’s take on this since every report I’ve ever read has Medsphere and their open source Vista solution as much less expensive than the commercial alternatives (Epic, Cerner, Eclipsys). So, I can’t imagine that the Medsphere bid was so much more than the others. Unless the consultants are charging through the nose for it. Or maybe the open source Vista option wasn’t “in the competitive range” because it was too cheap. Wouldn’t that be hilarious to consider. Hopefully the government isn’t that stupid, but…

I don’t claim to have any clue on how these $11 billion government contract bids work. I’m just a casual observer from the sideline. It seems like 3 companies remain in the ring. I guess the Google juice wasn’t enough for the PwC/Medsphere bid.

Healthcare Analytics is a Big Privacy Issue

Posted on March 18, 2014 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.

Coming out of HIMSS, everyone said that healthcare analytics was a major discussion. I talked to someone from Allscripts today and they quoted me that something like 42% of their business is coming from population health (analytics, patient portal, and HIE) functionality. Today someone else told me that the future of healthcare IT is going to really be around analytics and how we use the data. When you think about future revenue streams, the data is likely going to be the center of most business models.

Analytics is going to play a major role in the future of health IT and I believe will lead to really important improves in the care patients receive. My guess is that one day we’ll look back on the EHR of today and wonder how we saw patients with such limited data and intelligence built into the EHR.

However, Sheri Stoltenberg from Stoltenberg Consulting made a great comment to me at HIMSS which is the title of this blog post: Healthcare Analytics is a Big Privacy Issue.

While we love to talk about the benefits of big healthcare data and the value of healthcare analytics, it’s also got a lot of big privacy issues that I think we’re going to need to address. Many will argue that we already have HIPAA and that should be enough. Certainly it will provide the framework for privacy and security of healthcare data and analytics. However, that’s likely going to need to evolve as the healthcare analytics involves. I’m not sure we even know the issues that healthcare analytics will pose to privacy in 5 years. Unfortunately, I don’t see HIPAA being able to keep up with it.

If the healthcare IT industry were smart, it would start working together and appropriate privacy and security within healthcare analytics. If they don’t, be ready for the government to step in and impose it on them. We know how that usually works out.

Hopefully this blog post will be inspiration for every organization to consider the privacy and security issues associated with their healthcare analytics.

KLAS: Epic Losing Ground To Cerner

Posted on September 6, 2013 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.

At this point in the EMR buying cycle, one would figure that the market for new hospital EMR purchases is pretty saturated, especially among larger hospitals with the capital to invest in big health IT projects. But according to a recent blog entry from KLAS, that’s not exactly the case.

In his blog item, KLAS researcher Colin Buckley notes that his firm has been watching clinical IT vendor wins and losses at 200+ bed hospitals for 10 years.  During that period — and especially post- Meaningful Use — KLAS has seen a growing number of new hospital EMR contracts.

By this point, after lots of EMR buying, and some switching out technology for second and third-choice EMRs, one might think that over-200-bed hospitals had settled on a platform that they could live with through Meaningful  Use Stage 3. Actually, not quite, Buckley says.

In fact, KLAS data shows that there are more hospitals running legacy EMRs, homegrown EMRs or no EMR at all than those who have bought a currently-marketed solution sometime in the past four years. And it’s likely these hospitals will be choosing a new EMR from the current vendor marketplace within the new few years, KLAS projects.

As sales increase in the 200+ bed hospital segment, market forces are shifting to favor new vendors. What’s particularly noteworthy about this is that the research firm has seen the ratio of Epic-to-Cerner wins shrink from 5-to-1 in 2010 to 2-to-1 in 2012.

According to KLAS, the hospitals that are likely to be out buying new EMRs look different than those which have already bought and implemented the EMR they’ll use for the next several years. “They are smaller and more cost conscious than the large hospital IDNs that have given Epic a lion’s share of wins year after year,” Buckley writes.

With Cerner and Epic busy eating each other’s lunch, Allscripts, MEDITECH, McKesson and Siemens are moving ahead as quickly as possible to roll out integrated ancillary and ambulatory solutions, Buckley notes. In other words, the competition for both ambulatory and hospital EMRs is far from played out.

Despite all of this activity, we are clearly in a late stage of the EMR market as a whole, or as my colleague John Lynn puts it, “the Golden Age of EHR adoption is over.” But if KLAS is right, there’s still some very healthy bucks to be made selling to laggard mid-sized hospitals. Let’s see if vendors used to serving hospital giants can adapt in time.

KLAS Reports Cerner and Epic Combined to Capture More Than 3/4 of New Large Hospital EMR Contracts

Posted on August 28, 2013 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.

This tweet and associated messages are circling all around social media. Here’s the short description of the KLAS report:

HITECH has drastically changed the acute care EMR market. Previous industry mainstays like GE Healthcare and QuadraMed have effectively dropped out. McKesson has promoted their community hospital solution, Paragon, over their former flagship, Horizon. Allscripts, MEDITECH, and Siemens are all racing to recover from past stumbles and regain market share. Since meaningful use became a reality, Cerner and Epic have captured a large majority of new hospital contracts. However, there are still many decisions to be made in coming years and the remaining market is potentially more competitive than in years past.

For those of us following the industry, this isn’t really big news. Cerner and Epic have been battling for the big hospitals for quite a while. In fact, coming out of this year’s HIMSS I was more interested in the battle for small hospitals than large hospitals. Of course, we’ll see how hospital consolidation affects this as well.

What does seem clear and this report confirms is that Epic and Cerner all well positioned in the large hospital EMR market. I predict they’ll dominate until at least the end of meaningful use.

CommonWell Alliance Goals Challenged By ONC

Posted on April 8, 2013 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.

As virtually everyone in health IT knows, HIMSS saw the dawning of a new EMR vendor alliance which proposes to make health data exchange simpler.  The group, the CommonWell Alliance, includes McKesson, Cerner, Allscripts, Greenway and athenahealth, plus McKesson’s connectivity business RelayHealth.

Now that the PR fairy dust has settled and we’re talking serious business, it’s a good time to consider exactly what these vendors hope to accomplish, as we’re talking about enough vendor muscle to have a serious impact on the way health data is shared.

This week, ONC released a report doing just that, according to a piece in Government Health IT.  At a meeting of the Health IT Policy Committee on April 3, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology Farzad Mostashari, MD and other committee members discussed the report, which raised some hard questions about the Alliance.

According to Government Health IT, the report outlined the following as CommonWell’s chief goals:

  • Enabling providers to unambiguously identify patients – but not with a national patient identifier;
  • Providing a way to match patients with their healthcare records as they transition through care facilities;
  • Using existing unique identifiers (salted/hashed) such as cell phone number, email addresses or driver’s licenses for identity management;
  • Enabling patients to manage consent and authorization;
  • Creating a HIPAA-compliant and patient-centered means to simplify management of data-sharing consents and authorizations, focusing initially on the most common treatment situations;
  • Helping providers to find the location of patient records across care locations via a secure nationwide records locator service;
  • Enabling providers, with appropriate authorization, to issue targeted (directed) queries that provide for peer-to-peer (e.g., EHR to EHR) exchange.

Unlike most standards-setting efforts, members of the group are going to have to pay if they want to participate, a nice little detail that wasn’t made clear when CommonWell was announced.

Though it will be at least a year before CommonWell pilots its approach, members of the Committee are quite appropriately wondering now about the impact of such an effort.

Dr. Mostashari argued that the key question is whether the service will work as an optional overlay across a regional exchange, or whether it requires exclusive participation. Other committee members agreed.

The bottom line for committee members, Government Health IT reports, is that they’re willing to take a wait-and-see approach. As for us out here in the peanut gallery, I believe we should challenge the heck out of this thing.

Members of the Health IT Policy Committee are well advised to wonder whether this coming together of powerful HIT vendors could undermine broader efforts to foster interoperability. There’s a lot to look into here, even if the allmighty Epic never joins.

EMR Vendors Need To Get Their Act Together

Posted on March 22, 2013 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.

For quite some time now, EMR vendors have gotten away with selling products that aren’t very usable and may even pose safety risks. But that’s the price enterprise EMR buyers have been willing to pay to jump in and automate. Very soon, though, vendors may be held to a higher standard, a new report from KLAS.

KLAS recently held a bake-off comparing Allscripts, Cerner, Epic, McKesson’s Paragon, Meditech 6 and Siemens’ Soarian EMRs head to head where it comes to usability and efficiency, SearchHealthIT reports. The study looked at how the products worked for individual users, and then looked at how they meet organizational quality of care demands.

Some of the EMRs  — and I wish SearchHealthIT had told us which ones — took a full month for physicians to learn. In some cases, physicians who were willing to take that month ended up with a richer experience than those which were easy and quick to learn, while in other cases, the darned thing still wasn’t usable.  Of course, those with long learning curves and unimpressive features suffered from low physician adoption, the  publication notes.

This is all interesting enough, but what grabbed me about the story was a provider quote from an end user, supplied by KLAS:

“As suggested by the new 2014 certification standards, vendors should take more responsibility for both the usability and safety of their products. These responsibilities shouldn’t be the sole purview of healthcare organizations and providers like they have been until now.”

Could it be that providers have finally gotten to the point where they’re no longer going to put up with unusable products and bring the hammer down even on giants like the big-shouldered group listed above?  After all, so far providers have swallowed hard and accepted a lot of ugly technology.

Maybe Meaningful Use demands are finally giving health organizations the backbone they need to stand up to Jabba the Hutt vendors?

Epic Not Invited To CommonWell Interoperability Alliance

Posted on March 7, 2013 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.

Well, well, well. Far from refusing to participate, it looks like Epic may have been caught off-guard when a group of EMR players announced at HIMSS that they’d formed an interoperability alliance, according to a story appearing in Forbes.

For those who haven’t heard, Cerner, McKesson, Allscripts, Greenway Medical Technologies and athenahealth announced this week that they were forming the CommonWell Health Alliance, a non-profit dedicated to promoting interoperability between their products. Epic was conspicuously absent from the list of participants.

At the announcement’s outset, commentators like yours truly assumed that Epic, in its imperial way, had refused to join the party.  After all, McKesson CEO John Hammergren had told the press that “everyone in the industry” had been invited to take part in the club.

But no, apparently this isn’t the case. “No, we were not asked to join,” Carl Dvorak, COO of Epic told the business magazine’s Zina Moukheiber. “We found out about it when you guys did.”   Perhaps Epic wouldn’t have joined anyway — Dvorak is more of a fan of existing interoperability standards — but leaving a $1.5 billion EMR company off of the eVite list is pretty conspicuous too.

In the article, by the way, Dvorak repeats Epic’s often-made claim that their product isn’t a closed platform, stating that one-third of Epic EMR transactions are with non-Epic systems.  In fact, he says that Epic can already connect with Greenway, Cerner and Allscripts, as well as NextGen. I’m not sure everybody reading this will take that statement face value.

Invited or not, Dvorak doesn’t miss the chance to get off a shot at the CommonWell guys nonetheless. He argues, as I have, that CommonWell may be more of a PR play than a real forward movement for interoperabiility. “It’s a marketing opportunity [for vendors],” he told Forbes. “They create the perception of leaders in the space, where they’re followers.”

Top Inpatient EHR Vendors – 2013 Black Book Rankings

Posted on February 22, 2013 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 think that most of you know how I feel about the various EHR ranking systems. They all have their issues, but they are another interesting data point in the search for the right EHR. Plus, the EHR ranking trends over time can be interesting. Not to mention, it’s hard not to look at a post that has rankings. It’s almost un-American not to look.

So, I figured I’d post some of the Black Book Rankings over the next week. The following are the Top Ranked EHR Vendors for Inpatient Hospital Systems, Chains and IDN (in alphabetical order).

4MEDICA
ALLSCRIPTS
CPSI
EPIC
GE HEALTHCARE
HCS EMR
HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
HEALTHLAND
INFOMEDIKA
KEANE
MCKESSON
MEDITECH
NEXTGEN
PROGNOSIS HIT
QUADRAMED
SEQUEL
SIEMENS
UNI/CARE
VERSASUITE

Not too many surprises on the list. Was their any Hospital EHR vendor that you think should have made it on this list? I think this list would be more interesting if it just ranked the top 5 Hospital EHR vendors.

Other EHR Options When Epic Denies You

Posted on January 18, 2013 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 got the following email from the CIO of a hospital.

They’ve [Quadramed] got the whole ONC-ATCB certified EHR for Phase 1 MU (although the point in your post is valid about that certification being fairly general anymore). They are working on obtaining and integrating/interfacing ambulatory functionality for physician practices, but for hospitals they have some pretty good sized hospitals running their QCPR product. KLAS includes them in their evaluation of EHR vendors (along with the likes of Allscripts, Cerner, Epic, GE, McKesson, Meditech, and Siemens) although they clearly don’t have as many installed hospitals that most of that list has. They also need to develop some real patient portal type of functionality to stay certified for future MU Phases. Not a market leader, but they are a market player. In spirit of full disclosure, we are almost live with Quadramed product, and we will be using it as a full EHR for both inpatient and outpatient care settings. We could not afford the bigger vendor solutions, and Epic wouldn’t even talk with us because we are below their minimum size to qualify for their sales efforts….only vendor I’ve seen that has that luxury of flat out ignoring possible business. We didn’t like the inflexibility of the lower end EHR vendors, and Quadramed provided a lot of the flexibility of bigger vendors for the price of the smaller vendors.

I’d love to learn where other hospital CIOs turn when Epic won’t give them the time of day. Considering Epic’s hospital size requirements and who they will work with, this is more hospitals than not. I started a list of hospital EMR and EHR vendors that might help. Where do hospital CIOs go when Epic isn’t an option? Is there a Denied by Epic support group somewhere online where hospital CIOs can commiserate?