Cardiology 2016
Enterprise Considerations Influence Cardiology Consolidation

Merge and McKesson offer prebuilt templates that meet most clinicians' needs in different areas of cardiology. While all vendors allow customization, McKesson allows clients to custom-engineer their modules, but Merge closely monitors customizations and is more prescriptive to foster standardization across modules. According to their small customer base, INFINITT offers well-received, web-based modules that are implemented quickly; INFINITT's breadth of adoption is high, though they are selective about where they implement their platform in an effort to ensure they can adequately meet clients' needs. Providers expressed significant interest in the future of Philips IntelliSpace Cardiovascular despite slow improvement of the legacy Xcelera platform. Users of Siemens and Digisonics report little to no development, resulting in low interest, poor physician adoption, and stagnant growth.

 Note: Agfa HealthCare is in the early phases of rolling out new cardiology solutions that they claim will tie into the larger picture of enterprise imaging. KLAS validated installations from early adopters. KLAS was unable to validate providers using GE Centricity Cardiology Enterprise Solution in two or more areas. Cerner has partnered with ASCEND for cardiology, but KLAS was only able to validate facilities in the implementation phase. 

Some providers have begun to question whether Epic's solution will be able to effectively manage complex procedures in areas like cath. While early adopters began implementing pieces of Cupid over seven years ago, a large majority of Epic's customers continue to wait for the platform to mature so that they can replace their third-party vendors. Some respondents who had hoped to use Cupid are now adopting solutions from other vendors as providers develop their enterprise imaging strategies, and several are reverting to previous vendors due to continued workflow disruption and loss of efficiency. Epic does not provide imaging solutions, instead integrating with third-party vendors.

Due to the high level of customization required for full adoption of LUMEDX's niche solution, 38% of providers report that the vendor is not part of their long-term plans. Digisonics is a less attractive option due to their lack of an EP module and due to a cath module that is less robust than physicians require. Providers using Siemens and Fuji are disappointed with a lack of workflow improvement and are often dropping structured reporting even if they retain, at least for now, Siemens' or Fuji's cardiology PACS. 100% of the Epic customers KLAS surveyed, including those reverting back to their old solution, plan to retain Epic for the long term in the hope that the solution will eventually evolve.

For different reasons, McKesson and Merge customers have the highest number of physicians who have adopted the structured reporting solutions in multiple areas. Higher physician adoption of McKesson Cardiology for cath is partly due to the ease with which physicians are able to interact with templates and automate phrases for certain fields. McKesson's strong automation in echo has encouraged adoption in pediatric echo. Merge excels at facilitating physician-centric templates paired with guidance that fosters standardization. For their small customer base, Wolters Kluwer's high adoption in cath is due to a template that facilitates data entry and makes reports easier to read once completed. INFINITT's web-based platform is often adopted in nuclear medicine due to the ease of transferring images between radiology and cardiology.