Oops! Looks like you don't currently have access.
Your current membership doesn’t include access to this page, but don’t worry we can fix that.
To obtain access to this data,
contact Klas
at
KLAS Contact
Population Health Management 2015
How Far Can Your Vendor Take You?
Once an undertaking for only the most progressive health systems, value-based care is becoming a mainstream requirement for providers everywhere. The population health management (PHM) solutions that carry providers on this journey are many, but one size does not fit all. Choosing a vendor is high risk, with dozens of options, and some vendors already have upward of 30% of their customers planning to leave. Based on 213 interviews, this report sets out to explore 1) Which PHM vendors are being used by which providers; 2) Why providers choose certain vendors; 3) How well vendors meet expectations; 4) Where individual vendors perform best; and 5) What strengths and weaknesses stand out.
1. EPIC AND IBM (PHYTEL) PERFORM WELL FOR MORE COMPLEX EFFORTS OF LARGER PROVIDERS
While most vendors play across the provider landscape, each has a predominant customer profile based on factors such as complexity and level of risk assumed. Enli Health Intelligence, Forward Health, and i2i Systems perform well for meeting the more basic demands of clinics and small hospitals. Cerner, Epic, Healthagen, IBM (Explorys), IBM (Phytel), and Rise Health receive growing praise from larger IDNs.
2. SOLUTIONS FROM EMR VENDORS GAINING TRACTION; CUSTOMERS HUNGRY FOR DEEPER FUNCTIONALITY
Providers express a strong interest in their EMR vendors for PHM functionality. Epic users are pleased with broad functionality while wanting more robust analytics. Cerner is adept at consolidating data from diverse EMRs; users await the filling of the care-management gap. Providers say eClinicalWorks is good at the basics but ask for greater ability to customize for unique needs. athenahealth is adaptable, though integration of external data can be a challenge.
3. SOME LOOKING TO LEAVE: ADVISORY BOARD, ALLSCRIPTS, CONIFER HEALTH, MCKESSON, MEDECISION, OPTUM
Customer reasons for leaving vary from one vendor to the next but include insufficient breadth or depth of functionality (McKesson, Medecision), difficult data acquisition (Advisory Board, Conifer), and lack of usability (Allscripts, Optum). All six vendors have acquired technology through acquisition. After acquisitions, vendors often experience stunted innovation and development, interrupted relationships, and a drag on support quality. Among fully rated vendors, Enli, Epic, and Wellcentive have the most committed customer bases.
4. SERVICE IS CRITICAL MEDICINE FOR MATURING MARKET SEGMENT AND DATA-ACQUISITION PAINS
More than half of customers report challenges around immature, inflexible products. Data access is the only area in which criticism outweighs compliments. The best vendors address both areas with proactive service—a topic that few providers pay attention to during vendor selection.
SELECTION CRITERIA VERSUS REALITY
Want to see full details?
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. © 2019 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.