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

Preferences

   Bookmark

Related Series

Infection Control 2019
|
2019
Infection Control 2013
|
2013
Infection Control Systems 2012
|
2012
Infection Control 2011
|
2011
Infection Control
|
2009

Related Segments

 End chart zoom
Infection Control 2023 Infection Control 2023
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

Infection Control 2023
How Vendors Are Helping Drive Meaningful Outcomes Post-Pandemic

author - Jackson Tate
Author
Jackson Tate
author - Jennifer Hickenlooper
Author
Jennifer Hickenlooper
author - Neil Draper
Author
Neil Draper
 
January 26, 2023 | Read Time: 6  minutes

The infection control market is seeing increased adoption as the pandemic has emphasized the need for infection control solutions. Healthcare organizations have broadened their product’s functionality to adapt to pandemic-related needs, and many are considering best-of-breed offerings and—when available—their EMR vendor’s offering. As organizations evaluate their needs, they are looking to vendors to help drive meaningful outcomes and offer support should another healthcare emergency arise. This report examines the outcomes infection control vendors are helping users achieve, customer satisfaction, and optimism around how well vendors could support organizations in future healthcare emergencies.

Wolters Kluwer Drives Significant Outcomes with Solid Reporting and Technology

All vendors have at least a moderate impact on respondents’ clinical, reporting, and patient outcomes. The most commonly reported outcome is easy reporting for regulation agencies. Additionally, respondents for each vendor say their solution helps decrease hospital-acquired infections year over year—this outcome is most often reported by organizations whose solution has benchmarking capabilities. Wolters Kluwer and Premier stand out for significantly improving clinical workflows, compliance and quality reporting, and patient outcomes. Wolters Kluwer respondents say strong customer guidance helps establish best practices, and exceptional technology benchmarks data so users can monitor performance. The vendor’s Sentri7 platform enables cross-departmental collaboration and is highlighted for improving antimicrobial stewardship. Customers also mention that during the pandemic, Wolters Kluwer delivered new COVID-19 tracking functionality. The limited number of Premier respondents say the strong training program has infection control experts who help organizations reduce hospital-acquired infections, create trusted reporting, and focus on high priorities. VigiLanz is often highlighted for their proactive service and customizable solution that provides greater reporting accuracy and transparency. Most respondents have achieved clinical and patient outcomes as well; however, a few are not using the product in these areas or say it is too early to tell whether the solution drives outcomes. Customers of all three vendors value the ability to directly submit data to NHSN.

overall performance score and validated outcomes

Epic Seen as Long-Term Solution; Though Customers Say Product Has Room for Improvement, Many Feel Optimistic about Future

Many Epic EMR customers are leaving their best-of-breed infection control solutions and moving to Epic Bugsy. These customers appreciate that Epic Bugsy is part of an integrated enterprise platform and facilitates easy data aggregation for regulatory reporting. Respondents are optimistic that Epic will continue to develop the product to meet their needs. Though customers have been frustrated with Epic Bugsy’s technology in the past, many are starting to see improvements and more positive outcomes. Several say Epic has listened to feedback in recent years and improved the usability, reporting, and dashboards. There are customers who still feel the product has room for improvement (see details below), and 17% of respondents would not buy the product again.

part of long-term plans and would you buy again

A Note about Cerner

KLAS has insufficient performance data on Cerner’s infection control solution in this report. However, in the past, interviewed customers have reported low satisfaction (see chart below), and some have moved away from Cerner’s solution altogether. Though many organizations in this report’s sample are considering software consolidation, Cerner customers are looking at best-of-breed vendors to overcome their poor experience and meet their infection control needs. Prospective customers who have considered Cerner’s solution ultimately don’t select the vendor due to a perceived lack of functionality and product development.

2022 best in klas performance score cerner infection control

Customers of VigiLanz, Premier (Limited Data) Most Optimistic about Their Vendor’s Ability to Provide Support in a Future Healthcare Crisis 

vendors ability to support customers during future healthcare emergenceisVigiLanz and Premier respondents are most optimistic about their vendor’s ability to provide support during future healthcare emergencies. During the pandemic’s peak, VigiLanz respondents were confident in the executive and support teams, resulting in greater optimism around vendor support in a future crisis. The support team’s expertise allowed customers to quickly customize the product during the pandemic, and customers still trust the vendor and their ability to adapt (e.g., VigiLanz released cluster tracking functionality). Customers of Premier (limited data) are also optimistic because of the support team’s expertise. Over the last year, customer satisfaction has increased for various reasons. First, respondents say the vendor has made several improvements: the product is easier to use, data can be submitted directly to NHSN, and customers now have account managers who resolve issues more quickly. Second, some of Premier’s least-satisfied customers have left for other solutions. Of the four respondents who plan to leave, two intend to switch to a cheaper solution from their EMR vendor, despite their satisfaction with Premier. Overall, Premier respondents are the least likely to say the product is part of their long-term plans.

BD and Epic Customers Frustrated with Lacking Functionality and Expertise

 product has needed functionalityIn this report, Wolters Kluwer is rated highest for their product having needed functionality. Feedback on BD’s functionality is mixed—satisfied respondents highlight the ease of use around regulatory reporting and customizability, and dissatisfied respondents say constant maintenance is required for the data feed. Further, dissatisfied BD customers want more guidance and support from infection control experts. Epic respondents appreciate the solution’s capabilities, though many believe the ease of use and functionality need to improve. Implementations and upgrades cause frustration because they are unexpectedly difficult and often don’t have enough training. A few respondents also report post-upgrade bugs. Respondents would like greater expertise and quicker support from Epic. The most-satisfied respondents have strong internal technical support, allowing them to better use and configure the solution. Those who are least satisfied would like a more out-of-the-box solution, particularly regarding reporting.


About This Report

Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT solutions and services their organizations use. For this report, interviews were conducted over the last 12 months using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare software, which is composed of 16 numeric ratings questions and 4 yes/no questions, all weighted equally. Combined, the ratings for these questions make up the overall performance score, which is measured on a 100-point scale. The questions are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.

customer experience pillars software

To supplement the customer satisfaction data gathered with the standard evaluation, KLAS also created a supplemental evaluation to delve deeper into several questions specific to the infection control market. This evaluation asked respondents (1) what outcomes they have seen and how well their vendor helped drive those outcomes and (2) how optimistic they are about their vendor providing support in future healthcare emergencies.

Sample Sizes

Unless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique customer organizations interviewed for a given vendor or solution. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one customer organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. The table below shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each vendor or solution as well as the total number of individual respondents.

 Sample sizesSome respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given vendor or solution can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses 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.

author - Sarah Brown
Writer
Sarah Brown
author - Breanne Hunter
Designer
Breanne Hunter
 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. © 2025 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.