Outsourced Coding 2020
Which Firms Deliver Quality and Value?

Large Organizations Highly Satisfied with himagine, AGS Health Due to Responsive Support & Strong Partnership

himagine is a highly versatile and flexible firm (i.e., handles both inpatient and outpatient coding, is engaged for large and small projects, and can easily adjust the number of resources up or down depending on client needs). The firm has recently made some positive changes, particularly in the quality of the coding and himagine’s communication. Clients say the firm is listening better and seeking out additional opportunities to improve. A couple of clients mention that finding and onboarding new coders takes longer than they would like. Consistent high performer AGS Health has a relatively small customer base that includes some very large organizations. AGS Health offers both onshore and offshore resources, and the firm is described as professional, helpful, and responsive. Each client is assigned specific coders, who become highly proficient in that organization's needs. KLAS has validated both inpatient and outpatient coding engagements; a couple of clients feel AGS Health is better equipped for basic rather than specialty coding. GHR RevCycle Workforce (HCTec) also works with large organizations; the limited sample of interviewed clients view the firm as timely, proactive, and responsive.

† Organizations could be using their firm for both facility and pro fee coding.

Strong Execution from AGS Health, himagine & UASI Leads to High Value

AGS Health and himagine (both detailed above) and UASI all execute well on their engagements, leading clients to feel they get their money’s worth from the firms. UASI’s coders are highly accurate, typically meeting—and occasionally exceeding—expectations, and clients say that the rare issue with coder quality is quickly resolved. Multiple clients describe UASI as having reasonable rates; others say the firm brainstorms new initiatives and processes with them and doesn’t charge for this partnering. Most clients feel UASI is able to adjust coverage as needed; a couple feel they are less of a priority for UASI if they aren’t doing much work with the firm. Aviacode clients report good coding quality and acknowledge that the firm is responsive when issues arise. However, this responsiveness is not always followed up with action, and clients report staff turnover and communication issues between Aviacode’s onshore managers and offshore coders. These issues combined with the perception among some clients that the firm is expensive lead to lower-than-average perceptions of value. nThrive (detailed above) struggles to deliver strong value.

† Value scores are a composite of customer ratings for the the following standard KLAS metrics: money’s worth, avoids nickel-and-diming, drives tangible outcomes, and exceeds expectations.

CorroHealth Maintains Quality, Productivity Following Merger

CorroHealth was formed in September 2020 from the merger of four companies, including TrustHCS. Though TrustHCS’ outsourced coding clients felt some concern about the merger, they have not encountered any challenges. Clients praise CorroHealth’s coding quality as well as their regular audits, excellent reporting, and strong partnership. A few clients describe CorroHealth as more expensive than other firms, with one attributing the higher cost to the auditing that is included with the services. Clients of Aquity Solutions (formerly the production workforce unit of MModal) also remain satisfied following their firm’s spinoff and rebranding. Multiple clients highlight the quality and productivity of the firm’s coders; others describe the coders as hit or miss (some mention that the onshore resources are better than the offshore ones). The result of four vendors merging together, Ciox Health is praised for the quality and timeliness of their coding services. Clients note that issues sometimes arise when there is turnover among Ciox’s staff due to internal promotions; however, they say Ciox resolves these issues quickly.

Note: Some questions specific to the outsourced coding market were added to KLAS’ standard services evaluation after data collection for this project had begun; therefore sample sizes may be smaller than for other metrics in this report. See About This Report section for more details.

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 online in real time so that other providers and IT professionals can benefit from their peers’ experiences. To enable readers to more quickly understand high-level differences in vendor performance and give better context as to how each product compares to other offerings in the market, KLAS has organized the questions from the standard evaluation into five customer experience pillars—loyalty, operations, services, relationship, and value.

What Does “Limited Data” Mean? 

Some services are used in only a small number of facilities, some firms are resistant to providing client lists, and some respondents choose not to answer particular questions. Thus a firm’s sample size may vary from question to question and may not reach KLAS’ required threshold of 6 unique respondents. When a firm’s sample size for a particular question is less than 6, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 3, no score is shown. Note that when a firm 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.