Premium Reports
Contact KLAS
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report    Zoom in charts



Related Series

Cardiology 2022
Cardiology 2020
Cardiovascular Structured Reporting 2018
Cardiology 2017
Cardiology 2015
CVIS 2014
Cardiology 2013
Cardiology 2012
Cardiology 2011
Cardiology IT
In Search of a CVIS
Cardiology Reporting 2007
Cardiology Reporting and Hemodynamics Report 2005

Related Segments

Related Articles

 End chart zoom
Cardiology 2016 Cardiology 2016
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

Cardiology 2016
Enterprise Considerations Influence Cardiology Consolidation

author - Monique Rasband
Monique Rasband
author - Paul Warburton
Paul Warburton
November 7, 2016 | Read Time: 3  minutes

Enterprise imaging plans are reinforcing the need to consolidate to fewer structured reporting vendors despite a number of lower-performing options on the market coupled with slow vendor development overall. Clinician adoption has increased significantly, though hospitals are still being forced to choose between solutions that cannot yet meet all of their needs. KLAS interviewed organizations using their respective vendors for structured reporting in two or more areas to determine which vendors are most improving the physician experience.

1. Merge, McKesson, & INFINITT Strongest Consolidation Options

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.

expansion vs structured reporting improvement

 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. 

2. Epic Cupid: High Interest, Slow Development, Low Adoption

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.

epic cupid report card

3. LUMEDX, Digisonics, Fuji, Siemens Most Often Considered for Replacement

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.

planning to use the vendor going forward

4. McKesson Adopted for Customization; Merge Adopted for Standardization

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.

structured reporting by area
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report

This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2024 KLAS Research, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.