KLAS Contact
Contact KLAS
Contact KLAS
2024 BEST IN KLAS
Preferences
Related Series
2023
2022
2019
Related Segments
Drug Diversion Monitoring 2021
Are the Next-Gen Tools Ready for Prime Time?
Author
Jackson Tate
Author
Paul Warburton
Static for some time, the drug diversion monitoring market has seen a recent wave of next-generation solutions that seek to streamline the investigation process by providing consolidated, prioritized insights and more proactive alerting. However, these solutions are not all created equal. This report examines the customer experience of four next-gen vendors that have achieved broader integration and adoption—FairWarning, HelioMetrics, Invistics, and Kit Check. It also provides early insights on several next-gen solutions that are in more developmental phases (BD, Medacist, and Protenus). KLAS interviewed approximately 50% of the organizations that were live with a next-gen solution at the time this research was collected.
Kit Check Emerging as Most Mature Option in New Batch of Next-Gen Solutions
Kit Checkʼs solution is the most tried-and-tested among the various next-gen solutions—adopted by both small and large organizations (including some outpatient organizations), the solution has investigation and notification tools based on a wide breadth of data sources. FairWarning—who was recently acquired by Imprivata—has grown quickly thanks to adoption by existing patient privacy customers. Focused on delivering diversion insights via managed services, FairWarning is still building out needed integration. Invistics’ and HelioMetrics’ currently small customer bases include several larger health systems, and customers report the ability to ingest a wide variety of data. Potential customers like that the vendors are focused solely on drug diversion monitoring, though many say they will wait for the solutions to mature. Other vendors—including BD, Medacist, and Protenus—are still working with development partners to build out their next-gen solutions. Provider organizations express high interest, though the vendors have not yet driven significant adoption.
Kit Check and FairWarning Best at Meeting Customers’ Expectations for Diversion Monitoring 2.0
Kit Check and FairWarning—who take very different approaches to drug diversion monitoring—have done the best at managing and meeting customer expectations by providing proactive notifications and centralized investigation tools. Kit Check’s tool-based platform delivers proactive monitoring and alerts via end-user drill down reports (customers note the need for greater report customization). Kit Check was validated for all interfaces measured in this report, though few individual customers are live with all. FairWarning provides managed services that mine common next-gen data feeds (e.g., EMRs, ADCs, and narcotics vaults) for potentially problematic clinician patterns and behaviors that might otherwise go unnoticed. Customers of both vendors voice the need for additional or more expansive interfacing. Invistics customers value the depth and breadth of the data their solution delivers. They would like simpler drill-down options that provide more consolidated views, and some customers say the vendor has been slow in releasing these updates and in implementing new interfaces. HelioMetrics customers report easy access to and clear visualization of a breadth of data; they say the tool’s proactive monitoring and prioritization of potential diversion is not as intuitive or seamless as they expected.
Vendor Performance in Key Metrics
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 providers and IT professionals can benefit from their peers’ experiences.
To supplement the data gathered with this standard evaluation, KLAS also creates various supplemental evaluations that target a subset of KLAS’ overall sampling and delve deeper into the most pressing questions facing healthcare technology today.
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 vendor 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.
Writer
Elizabeth Pew
Project Manager
Natalie Jamison
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.