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



Related Series

 No Related Series

Related Segments

Related Articles

 End chart zoom
Global (Non-US) EMR Implementations 2019 Global (Non-US) EMR Implementations 2019
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

Global (Non-US) EMR Implementations 2019
Who Can Best Help Me Navigate My EMR Implementation?

author - Everton Santos
Everton Santos
author - Jonathan Christensen
Jonathan Christensen
September 12, 2019 | Read Time: 3  minutes

Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 2/7/2023 1:45:21 PM and Model.reportId = 1461

Given the intense nature of an EMR implementation, it is natural that most projects will experience at least a few unexpected hurdles. In fact, about 30% of healthcare organizations outside the US report going over budget and 40% report vendor-missed timelines. However, feedback from recent implementations shows that some vendors are much more likely to help their clients stay on budget, on time, and within scope. Which vendors make the list?

† Data for this report was collected from organizations outside the US who contracted for an EMR between January 2016 and August 2018 and who are either currently implementing their solution or have already done so. Feedback was also collected from some organizations who have an ongoing implementation that started prior to January 2016.

HtmlReportContent Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 2/7/2023 1:45:21 PM and Model.reportId= 1461 and Model.HtmlReportContent_LastWriteTimeUtcInTicks=637534255888353779

Epic’s Methodology Leads to Highest Overall Satisfaction; Philips, Agfa, & ChipSoft Are Strong Regional Options

Epic implementations are some of the largest in scope and budget, and the vendor’s clear expectations and strict adherence to implementation standards help keep projects on pace and on budget, generating high implementation satisfaction. Implementations from widely-considered Cerner satisfy most customers overall; performance in individual metrics is average. Philips’ first customers outside Brazil report a strong focus on customer success. However, Philips’ expansion has delayed Brazilian implementations and the HTML 5 rollout. Agfa HealthCare and ChipSoft deliver solutions tailored to local needs. ChipSoft knows the Dutch market well, allowing

overall implementation satisfaction vs net new contracts

them to bring customers live on time, mostly on budget, and within scope. All three interviewed Agfa customers (Germany and Brazil) hit their timeline, scope, and budget.

Budget Overruns Caused by Bumpy Projects for Allscripts, InterSystems; by Unexpected Costs for MEDITECH

Allscripts customers feel the vendor is more focused on selling than on implementation success. While customers say Allscripts’ bench strength is growing, non-US resources still lack expertise, leading them to underestimate things like infrastructure and go-live resources. InterSystems is prone to overpromising on both scope and timelines, leading to budget overruns. Additionally, recent growth is causing resource constraints that hamper all aspects of an implementation. Citing unexpected third-party, infrastructure, or other costs, MEDITECH customers are the most likely to report budget overruns (usually 10%–20%). Though they would like more cost transparency, they are satisfied with MEDITECH’s ability to hit timelines and stay within scope.

status of implementation budget

Regional Solutions Fastest to Implement, Though Satisfaction Varies

Regional solutions from Health Insights, MV, DXC Technology, and Agfa have some of the fastest average deployment times. Health Insights customers report a good experience overall, with some hiccups. Satisfaction with MV is split and often depends on which resources an organization receives. DXC customers are generally dissatisfied. ezCaretech has recently expanded to multiple regions but still keeps projects on time and within scope.

status of vendor controlled timelines

The more long-standing multiregional vendors average over 20 months to go live. Cerner has the longest average time, with their longest deployments being first-in-country implementations. However, with one exception, interviewed customers are generally satisfied with Cerner’s efforts overall, placing Cerner in the top tier in terms of overall implementation satisfaction. Strengths include a collaborative attitude; areas for improvement include implementation methodologies and timelines—half of respondents say Cerner has missed timelines within their control.

While "ahead of schedule" was a response option, no interviewed clients selected it.

Multiregional Vendors Offer Broadest Portfolios; Epic Customers Implement Widest Variety of Modules

Contracting for a significant portion of an EMR vendor’s portfolio has become more common, a trend that benefits Epic, whose customers report the broadest platform deployment. While Allscripts, Cerner Millennium, and InterSystems also offer comprehensive solutions, their customers are more likely to maintain some best-of-breed systems. ezCaretech and MEDITECH are compelling to organizations for combining comprehensive solutions at lower price points. Customers of DXC Technology and Cerner—some of the market’s least expensive options—tend to deploy a fraction of the functionality adopted by other customer bases. everis promises broad functionality, though two-thirds of customers say they have underdelivered.

module adoption
author - Elizabeth Pew
Elizabeth Pew
author - Natalie Jamison
Natalie Jamison
author - Sydney Toomer
Project Manager
Sydney Toomer
 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. © 2023 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.