Premium Reports
Epic's Global Performance

Epic's Global Performance
An Early Look at Customers Outside the U.S.

Authored by: | Read Time: 2 minutes

Provider interest in Epic continues to increase in many regions of the world. Notwithstanding Epic’s large, proven install base in the U.S., many providers wonder whether Epic’s U.S. success can translate globally and whether it is worth the higher price. KLAS spoke with all seven organizations live with (and nearly all those implementing) EpicCare Inpatient EMR outside the U.S. KLAS primarily interviewed healthcare executives and directors to answer providers’ questions about the Epic customer experience (from implementation until post– go-live), budget accuracy, and depth of adoption.º ºKLAS interviewed multiple individuals in areas with significant press coverage. This report focuses on the experiences of those interviewed rather than on third-party reports.

1. ALL NON-U.S. EPIC CLIENTS REPORT HIGH PERFORMANCE

Epic’s live customers outside the U.S. are pleased with Epic’s commitment to their success and the outcomes they have achieved. These early adopters report an experience that is very similar to that of early Epic adopters within the U.S. Customers in both situations report a very consistent experience and high performance. Epic’s performance places them well ahead of the average global EMR vendors.

2. EPIC HIGHER PRICED BUT ON BUDGET AND TRANSPARENT

All live Epic organizations but one say budget estimates and implementation costs were accurate and transparent, with no unexpected expenses. Providers suggest following Epic’s budgetary recommendations to stay on track. Due to Epic’s higher cost, some organizations tried to cut corners in their budgets and had difficulty meeting timelines due to resource constraints. Though customers report smooth implementations, a few report lengthy contract negotiations with limited concessions made by Epic.

3. MORE COUNTRY-SPECIFIC AWARENESS WANTED

Overall, providers report being pleased with Epic’s efforts to ensure that positive implementation outcomes are achieved. However, providers note challenges with inexperienced support personnel, cultural differences, and Epic’s understanding of the local healthcare landscape. Even with these challenges complicating an already rigorous implementation and training process, providers agree that their success after the go-live outweighs any challenges.

4. UP-FRONT CLINICIAN INVOLVEMENT DRIVES DEEP ADOPTION, IMPROVES CARE

Epic customers report involving more clinicians than IT personnel throughout the implementation process. Though somewhat unorthodox, this up-front clinician involvement helps organizations gain near-immediate buy-in and deep adoption among nurses and physicians after the go-live. Customers report a significant impact on patient care as a result, giving providers the ability to read physician notes, deliver care faster, standardize care, and use analytics to improve patient safety.

5. PROVIDERS ADOPTING MOST CORE MODULES; FEWER REPLACING LABORATORY AND RADIOLOGY

Satisfaction with Epic’s modules is very high, and providers plan to roll out most clinical modules, with the exception of laboratory and radiology. The laboratory module is still developing and doesn’t always meet providers’ needs, and half of customers plan to stick with their current solution. Those not adopting the radiology module feel their existing system has the needed functionality and interfaces. On the financial/administrative side, most organizations find that Epic’s registration, scheduling, patient accounting, and PAS products meet their needs, though a few have supplemented Epic’s solutions with other, more localized solutions.

Want to see full details?

 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. © 2018 KLAS Enterprises, 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.