KLAS Contact
Contact KLAS
Contact KLAS
2024 BEST IN KLAS
Preferences
Related Series
Related Segments
Robotic Process Automation 2021
Adoption Moving Mainstream
Author
Boyd Stewart
Author
Elizabeth Pew
Author
Alex McIntosh
Use of robotic process automation (RPA) technology in healthcare continues to grow. Early adopters focused primarily on automating repetitive and time-consuming revenue cycle management (RCM) tasks. Having achieved positive ROIs, they see the opportunity to drive additional efficiency and bottom-line improvements, both within RCM and in other areas of their organizations. This report dives into the performance of several early leaders in RPA to compare how they perform and how well they meet customers’ needs and expectations.
Note: While multiple vendors in this report offer automation as a service, only Olive does so exclusively. Readers can find customer experience information about Olive’s managed services offering in a separate section at the end of this report.
Validated Adoption: Where Is Automation Being Used Today?
UiPath's large customer base uses the solution across their organizations, in revenue cycle processes as well as for ERP and clinical use cases. Customers have used the technology to automate various tasks within the EMR, saving employees time and increasing efficiency. UiPath and Boston Software Systems are the only vendors whose automation is validated in this research sample as being used for materials management. Boston Software Systems is used with a wider variety of technology vendors. While the majority of customers use less than five bots per site, some have expanded their use to a wide variety of processes, mostly in the business office, where there are bots focused on claims statusing, data migration, and a host of other business office tasks. Databound customers routinely use a large number of bots, with many using Databound to migrate data between different Cerner EMRs. The solution is also used frequently for claims statusing, adjustments, payment posting, and various patient access tasks. KLAS has validated Colburn Hill Group being used in revenue cycle areas, with multiple respondents reporting strong success for tasks such as claims statusing, authorizations, and adjustments.
Databound Excels at Complex Installations/Use Cases; Colburn Hill Group Performs Well in Simpler Settings
Customers give Databound and Colburn Hill Group near-perfect overall scores. Databound customers—who tend to be larger, more complex organizations—have often achieved deep adoption, reporting an average of 72 bots per site. Nearly all customer comments on the vendor are positive, and customers note that although the product can seem complex, Databound offers outstanding support and partners with customers to ensure the product is set up in a way that meets their needs. Once the solution is implemented and learned, “it can do amazing things” (as one respondent described it) to drive efficiency and create value, and customers frequently highlight the quality of Databound’s upgrades. Colburn Hill Group is typically found in less complex organizations—though their customer base includes some larger organizations as well—and customers typically use fewer bots (5 per site on average). The limited number of interviewed customers value the relationship they have with Colburn Hill, who they say is willing to change or add things to the product without additional cost, leading to perceptions of high value. Customers describe the product as easy to use, and several say they are looking forward to the future and the new functionality the vendor will provide. Customers of Boston Software Systems feel the vendor goes above and beyond to keep promises and, despite some shortcomings with the delivery of new technology, delivers a product that meets expectations.
Databound & Colburn Hill Group Receive High Marks for Relationships; UiPath Stumbles in Key Metrics
With any healthcare IT solution, customer perceptions of their vendor relationship are a key indicator of their current and future satisfaction. Databound customers particularly praise the vendor’s culture and relationships, saying the vendor keeps their promises, has highly involved executives, and is always available to help when issues arise. Colburn Hill Group has a smaller number of customers; those interviewed have only positive things to say about their interactions with the vendor, giving them perfect scores across all relationship metrics. Customers report that Colburn Hill “runs a high-integrity shop from the top down” and is highly proactive in working hand in hand with customers to ensure their needs are met. Customers of UiPath—a highly recognized name in RPA—describe a stable, well-integrated product. Relationships are an area of concern for customers, who view UiPath as unresponsive to problems, leading to lower overall satisfaction. Several customers report that email is their only avenue for receiving support, and they are frustrated that UiPath is not more accessible.
Most Organizations Expect to Increase RPA Use, with Boston, Databound, UiPath Customers Expanding a Variety of Non-RCM Use Cases
Having achieved increased efficiency and decreased reliance on FTE labor with their current use cases, organizations that use RPA technology are on the lookout for additional areas in which automation could be deployed. Increased revenue cycle automation seems to be in the works for most. Some customers of Boston Software Systems, Databound, and UiPath also have active plans to increase their use of automation for clinical processes, such as data entry, data aggregation, and notice of admissions. Some Databound and Boston Software Systems customers also hope to expand automation into HR.
Olive: Strong in Fundamental Revenue Cycle Automation, Struggles to Meet More Complex Expectations
Interviewed Olive customers validate using the vendor’s automation tools (which are offered exclusively through managed services) for patient access and business office tasks, with clients reporting strong success in areas such as claims statusing, authorizations, and adjustments. Clients like the fact that “end users don’t have to do a thing” and that Olive is pushing the needle in what can be done for automation. Customers feel Olive’s culture, however, leaves room for improvement. For example, several note that Olive’s sales team promised more than the solution could deliver. Additionally, customers feel Olive is not proactive in addressing issues and, at times, lacks knowledge of their own product's capabilities, preventing customers from fully leveraging the solution in more complex ways. The clients who have not been successful in using Olive for more complex initiatives have lower ROI perceptions and are thus less likely to report expansion plans.
A Note about Future Research
This report is KLAS' first look at the RPA market. KLAS intends to expand the scope of future research to include areas such as use case complexity, functionality gaps, key strengths, value, and future outlook.
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 in reports like this one and online in real time so that other providers and IT professionals can benefit from their peers’ experiences. All ratings in this report related to customer satisfaction come from this evaluation and were collected over the last 12 months.
The number of unique responding organizations for each evaluation type is given in the chart below.
What Does "Limited Data" Mean?
Some products are used in only a small number of facilities, some vendors are resistant to providing client lists, and some respondents choose not to answer particular questions. Thus a vendor’s sample size may vary from question to question and may not reach KLAS’ required threshold of 15 unique respondents. When a vendor’s sample size 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.
Writer
Elizabeth Pew
Designer
Madison Moniz
Project Manager
Mary Brown
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.