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!

5 Year Projected Growth Rate for Healthcare Analytics Market

Posted on July 30, 2014 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 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.

iHealthBeat recently reported some interesting data on the Healthcare Analytics market growth:

The market for health care analytics is projected to increase at a 25% compound annual growth rate between 2014 and 2019,according to a new report from Research and Markets, Health IT Analytics reports (Bresnick,  Health IT Analytics, 7/24).

If anything, I’d suggest that this is a conservative growth rate for the Healthcare Analytics market. If you go into any hospital, health analytics is one of the only thing they’re spending new money on.

In the same article linked above they suggested these companies as the major players:

  • Inovalon
  • LexisNexis
  • McKesson
  • Oracle
  • Predixion
  • SAS
  • Truven Health Analytics
  • Verisk Health

I agree that these companies will be involved, but I’m more interested in the newer Health Analytics companies that are entering and going to enter the market. We’ll see how that plays out since it seems like pretty much every healthcare IT company is creating some sort of health analytics offering.

What are your hospital’s healthcare analytics plans?

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.

Business Intelligence And The Smart EMR

Posted on July 26, 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.

A new study by KLAS suggests that while providers are giving thought to business intelligence needs, they still haven’t honed in on favored vendors that they see as holding a leading position in healthcare. That may be, I’d suggest, because the industry is still waiting on EMRs that can offer the BI functionality they really need.

To look at the issue of BI in healthcare, KLAS interviewed execs at more than 70 hospitals and delivery systems with 200 or more beds.

When asked which BI vendors will stand out in the healthcare industry, 41 percent of respondents replied that they weren’t sure, according to a story in Health Data Management.

Of the other 59 percent who chose a vendor, IBM, SAP, Microsoft and Oracle came up as leaders in enterprise BI applications — but none of the above got more than 12 percent of the vote, HDM notes.

Vendors that did get a nod as standing out in healthcare-specific BI included Explorys, Health Catalyst, McKesson and Humedica (Optum). IBM and Microsoft were also singled out for healthcare use, but respondents noted that their products came with high price tags.

Meanwhile, QlikTech and Tableau Software were noted for their usability and data visualization tools though lacking in full BI toolsets, according to HDM.

While these stats are somewhat interesting on their own, they sidestep a very important issue:  when will EMRs evolve from transaction-based to intelligence-based systems?  After all, an intelligence-based EMR can do more to improve healthcare in context than freestanding BI systems.

As my colleague John Lynn notes, EMRs will ultimately need to leverage big data and support smart processes, becoming what he likes to call the “Smart EMR.”  These systems will integrate business intelligence natively rather than requiring a whole separate infrastructure to gather insights from the tsunami of patient data being generated today.

The reality, unfortunately, is that we’re a fairly long way away from having such Smart EMRs in place. Readers, how long to you think it will take before such a next-gen EMR hits the market?  And who do you think will be the first to market with such a system?

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 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 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.

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 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 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.

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?

A Hospital Chooses VistA EMR Over The Giants

Posted on January 15, 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.

Here’s a story out of the pages of Forbes which should make open source advocates happy. In it, we hear the tale of a northern California hospital which decided to buck corporate trends and go with VistA rather than pay for a big-ticket EMR from a vendor giant.

Three years ago, at the outset of its EMR search, Oroville Hospital was going down the same path as most of peers. But the CEO wasn’t terribly happy with that path. While the 153-bed hospital had shortlisted giants like Cerner, McKesson and Meditech as possible candidates, chief executive Robert Wentz was worried about the sky-high cost, disruption and — as a smaller facility — lack of clout with vendors, Forbes reports.

Shunning conventional choices, Wentz decided to take a risk on VistA. Not only did he go with the less-conservative choice, he decided not to partner with companies like Medsphere that help hospitals integrate and develop VistA to meet their needs. Instead, he chose to work with independent VistA experts (a rogue crew with day jobs of their own) rather than be tied to a particular vendor.

To coordinate the project, Wentz worked with the non-profit WorldVistA and Vista Expertise Network, both of which embrace hundreds of programmers with VistA smarts. Wentz worked with programmers from the two groups, not only to build  out the hospital’s EMR but also to develop additional add-ons such as an e-prescribing package. WorldVistA CIO helped Oroville get its package certified for Meaningful Use, which brought in $5 million.

Now, three years into the project, Oroville has spent about $10 million on its EMR, about one-half of what it expected to spend on the giant EMR-makers’ software.

Now, it’s worth bearing in mind that Wentz and his IT team had to be more flexible than they would have if an army of consultants from Cerner or Epic had run the show. (I love the part in the Forbes story where a programmer told Wentz he had to end the call so he could make a trip to Costco. Classic.)  But Oroville seems to have reaped the benefits.  I wonder if this story will lead to more VistA adoption…

Top 10 Hospital EHR Vendors By Installed Systems

Posted on December 21, 2012 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 15 blogs containing almost 6000 articles with John having written over 3000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 13 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.

I came across this list of Top 10 Hospital EHR vendors by installed systems on Dark Daily (a great resource, particularly if you’re into Labs). The data is a little dated, but I thought it would be interesting to consider the numbers in 2011 and how they might look different today. Here’s the list:

Vendor Name Total Installations Percent of Installations
• Meditech 1212 25.50%
• Cerner 606 12.80%
• McKesson 573 12.10%
• Epic Systems 413 8.70%
• Siemens Healthcare 397 8.40%
• CPSI 392 8.30%
• Healthcare Management Systems 347 7.30%
• Self-developed 273 5.80%
• Healthland 223 4.70%
• Eclipsys (Bought by Allscripts) 185 3.90%

This list was taken from the HIMSS Analytics database. I wish I had access so I could compare these numbers for 2012. The interesting thing is that I’m not sure the Hospital EHR vendor numbers would be all that much different. Epic is the media darling, but its focus is squarely on the large hospital systems so they often lag behind when it comes to total installations.