Computer-Assisted Coding 2021
Which Vendors Best Meet Needs in the Face of COVID-19?

Dolbey Updates Are Met with High Customer Satisfaction

Customers of 2021 Best in KLAS winner Dolbey praise the accuracy and quality of their solution’s coding suggestions and say this, along with the system’s ease of use, results in higher coder productivity. Updates from Dolbey—including a major software upgrade released in May 2020 as well as ongoing updates related to COVID-19—have been well received. Organizations that have upgraded to the new version say it has improved some previous reporting frustrations and also provides an improved layout and workflow, making the solution even easier to use. A few customers that haven’t yet taken the upgrade are optimistic about the new functionality but disappointed in the cost.

Updates from Optum & 3M Draw Mixed Reviews

Optum’s solution offers strong natural language processing (NLP) functionality; some respondents say refining the tool out of the box takes longer than they would like, though they appreciate Optum’s willingness to help throughout this process. Recent updates have provided new business activity monitoring, which customers say has improved transparency. However, recent changes to the query tool have decreased productivity, and a few respondents report some instability and poor training when new technology is released. Some customers of market share leader 3M—who offers a broad HIM suite—also report a longer-than-anticipated tuning period out of the box. They appreciate 3M’s help adjusting the suggested codes; a few say the solution’s suggestions are not always appropriately aligned to the patient (e.g., hysterectomy code recommended for a male patient). During upgrades, stability challenges can cause excessive downtime that is met by a slow response from support.

Dolbey, 3M & Optum All Helpful in Their Response to COVID-19

In general, CAC vendors responded well to the COVID-19 pandemic, quickly implementing new codes and functionality within their software. Interviewed customers highlight the following actions by each vendor. Dolbey waived fees for additional beds used during the crisis and helped customers prioritize the review of COVID-related charts. 3M provided online resources and presentations to help customers better understand and utilize COVID-related software changes. A couple of customers mention disappointment that other promised updates have been delayed. Optum has proactively reached out to customers and provides a COVID-19 education program, including webinars, that organizations can use to train their staff members.

Dolbey’s Service & Support Continue to Set the Bar; 3M Customers Report Improvement & Optimism

Dolbey customers praise the vendor’s service and support, describing Dolbey as proactive, responsive, and helpful. 3M customers have seen significant improvement in their support since 3M implemented a new customer service representative model. Though change is slow (which some respondents attribute to 3M’s size), customers say 3M is starting to listen better, and they appreciate the new direction. The most commonly mentioned area still in need of improvement is the timeliness of ticket resolution.

Customers Say 3M’s Licensing Fees Create Frequent, Unexpected Charges

Over half of interviewed 3M customers feel the vendor nickel-and-dimes them. Several report that to be successful with the solution, they had to purchase additional functionality above and beyond the already pricey base model. Additionally, while many vendors were flexible with costs during the pandemic, some 3M customers feel they were charged high fees when they were forced to ramp up resources due to COVID-19. This experience is also reported by Optum customers, and both vendors are described as overzealous in their frequent efforts to identify—and charge for—additional users. Dolbey customers report that they pay for upgrades but experience few additional charges beyond that. Additionally, as previously noted, Dolbey did not charge customers for increased census counts caused by COVID-19.

About This Report

Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT products and services their organizations use. These interviews are conducted using a standard quantitative evaluation, and the scores and commentary collected are shared in reports like this one and online in real time so that other healthcare professionals can benefit from their peers’ experiences. The questions from the standard evaluation are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.

To supplement the customer experience insights gathered with the standard evaluation, KLAS also used a separate, supplemental evaluation to interview a smaller sample of customers regarding issues specific to the computer-assisted coding market.

The data in this report comes from both evaluation types and was collected over the last 12 months; the number of unique responding organizations for each is given in the chart below.

What Does “Limited Data” Mean?

Some products are used in only a small number of facilities, some vendors are resistant to providing client lists, and some respondents choose not to answer particular questions. Thus a vendor’s sample size may vary from question to question and may not reach KLAS’ required threshold of 15 unique respondents. When a vendor’s sample size for a particular question is less than 15, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 6, no score is shown. Note that when a vendor has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.

Overall scores are measured on a 100-point scale and represent the weighted average of several yes/no questions as well as other questions scored on a 9-point scale.