Patient Privacy Monitoring 2019
Who Stands Out in a Highly Competitive Market?

Author
Paul Pitcher

Author
Dan Czech

April 2, 2019 | Read Time: 3 minutes

The patient privacy environment today includes heightened regulatory demands, constrained resources, and an increasing number of PHI breaches, which are often tied to inappropriate insider access. Organizations can no longer protect patient privacy and meet regulatory demands simply by combing audit logs. They need patient privacy monitoring vendors who deliver partner-level service and strong solutions that limit false positives. KLAS interviewed 106 provider organizations to find out which vendors excel in these areas and which decision factors are key in purchasing decisions today.

Protenus, FairWarning (MPS), and Maize Analytics Excel at Meeting Needs

Nearly all Protenus, FairWarning MPS, and Maize Analytics customers report high satisfaction. Protenus, who mostly serves large organizations, is very attentive to customer needs and takes time to understand customers’ environments. Partnership on product development comes from both Protenus’ leadership and their customer success representatives. Maize Analytics, used mostly by large hospitals and practices, offers a high level of customer support, beginning in the sales cycle, where expectations are properly set. Protenus and Maize Analytics customers are cautiously optimistic these vendors will continue to deliver a strong customer experience as they grow their respective customer bases. FairWarning MPS, an enticing option for community hospitals that scales to large IDNs, leverages a skilled team to partner with organizations, understand their needs, and provide frequent touchpoints.

Why MPS?

Managed privacy services (MPS) provide a first line of defense against privacy breaches through a dedicated, outsourced privacy team. MPS may help alleviate organizations’ resource, budget, and time constraints. Vendors may provide MPS themselves or partner with outside MPS firms. For more details on MPS, see the Expanded Insights section.

Delivery Inconsistent from FairWarning (Non-MPS) and Iatric Systems

While all vendors in the patient privacy monitoring market generally meet customer expectations (scoring >85 out of 100), customers using FairWarning for software only (no managed privacy services) or Iatric Systems are least likely to be highly satisfied (overall score >90). FairWarning’s non-MPS customers—who are typically larger organizations—are less likely than MPS customers to receive the service and support they need to effectively manage the solution, and they report a high number of false positives, which puts a burden on privacy staff. All of the interviewed organizations considering leaving FairWarning are non-MPS customers. Less-satisfied Iatric Systems customers see the technology as stagnant and struggle to get the executive involvement they desire.

Protenus, Maize Analytics, and FairWarning (MPS) Reduce False-Positive Burden on Customers

Machine-learning capabilities allow Protenus and Maize Analytics customers to quickly achieve low levels of false positives. Protenus customers can adjust the case-based monitoring^‡ system to accommodate their needs, and this allows Protenus to refine and create new machine-learning models. Maize customers report their vendor is willing to tweak algorithms and guide customers through the system’s initial setup and fine-tuning process. FairWarning’s MPS customers consistently report high satisfaction with the vendor’s filtering of false positives, which enables organizations to investigate only likely privacy incidents and limit staff volumes. Unlike other vendors’ customers, interviewed Iatric Systems customers rarely mention false positives; one customer did share optimism that anticipated functionality will reduce false positives in the future.

‡ For more details on case-based monitoring, see the Expanded Insights section of this report.

frequency of mentions about false positives

FairWarning, Maize Analytics, and Protenus Often Considered; Purchasing Decisions Driven Largely by Ability to Reduce False Positives

reasons for win reasons for loss replacement

Writer
Amanda Wind Smith

Designer
Natalie Jamison

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. © 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.