How Do Leading EHR Vendors Stack Up Against Each Other?
EHR vendor Epic came in first in terms of overall product suite and overall loyalty, with 63 percent of customers reporting deep interoperability.
As the digital health transformation progresses, the use of health IT continues to grow. New KLAS reports outline the strengths and weaknesses of four of the top EHR vendors in terms of interoperability, cost, and more.
Epic Systems
Epic’s combined overall product suite grade came in at a B+, slightly over the market average of a B. Additionally, Epic received an A for its combined overall loyalty grade, surpassing the market average of a B+.
2021 marks the 11th year that Epic has been named Best in KLAS Overall Software Suite, the report noted.
Overall, 94 percent of customers reported satisfaction with the EHR implementation, and 63 percent of customers reported deep interoperability with the health IT.
The report noted that customers have widely adopted Epic’s patient portal and population health management solution, as well. Additionally, Epic’s EHR has been proven effective in large, complex organizations and holds the largest market share in US hospitals, KLAS wrote.
However, Epic’s significant up-front cost remains a barrier for many organizations, the report noted. There is also no direct option for community hospitals with 200 beds or less.
Another downside of the technology is that customers are mostly on their own to develop expertise for cardiology, oncology, behavioral health, and Cogito machine learning solutions.
Meditech
Meditech, like Epic, scored a B+ for the combined overall product suite grade. In terms of combined overall loyalty, the vendor received an A-.
Overall, 90 percent of customers reported satisfaction with Meditech’s core Expanse suite which users said is updated consistently for increased usability. However, just 10 percent of customers reported significant between-vendor interoperability.
“The limited number of early adopters have achieved interoperability through opt-in connection to CommonWell,” the report authors wrote. “Other customers typically still leverage point-to-point interfaces or HIEs; many Expanse customers are focused on getting the solution up and running before tackling issues like interoperability.”
The health IT provides healthcare organizations with an integrated platform across revenue cycle, ambulatory care, and acute care departments.
It is seen as an affordable option for EHR integration, receiving the title of Best in KLAS for community hospital EMR for the second year in a row. Some larger organizations hesitate to choose Meditech due to a lack of proof points for non-core functionality, the authors explained.
Cerner
The EHR vendor scored a C for combined overall product suite, coming in below the market average of a B. However, Cerner fell behind the market average for combined overall loyalty, with a score of C+ compared to the average B+.
The Millenium HER suite’s broad technology reduces the need for third-party solutions, allowing consistency within clinician workflows, the report authors noted.
While the vendor’s clinical systems have proven successful in large, complex organizations, Cerner’s patient accounting module presents significant challenges for large organizations, according to the report.
Smaller care organizations often opt for Cerner for its robust, scalable clinical system that can be adjusted to the needs of smaller hospitals, the authors explained.
Overall, 62 percent of Cerner customers reported satisfaction with their health IT investment. However, just 28 percent of customers reported deep different-vendor interoperability.
The authors noted that a barrier to Cerner EHR integration is the need for significant internal resources to set up and customize the suite’s required transformational technology.
Allscripts
Allscripts scored below the market average for combined overall product suite grade and combined overall loyalty grade, earning a C- for both.
The vendor’s Sunrise platform offers a suite of fully integrated, highly customizable clinical solutions for acute and ambulatory care.
KLAS noted that the Sunrise acute care clinical solution is used by both small and very large organizations, while Sunrise Ambulatory Care and Sunrise Financial Manager have not been widely adopted.
According to the report, customers report significant interface maintenance with Allscripts transformational technology solutions for population health, patient engagement, and telehealth as they are found on disparate databases.
Additionally, the authors noted that the EHR updates can break interfaces for highly customized versions of the platform. Still, over half of customers (53 percent) reported satisfaction with their health IT investment.
The authors noted that adoption of the vendor’s dbMotion HIE platform has slowed, leading to lower levels of internal and external data sharing. Less than 20 percent (18 percent) of customers reported significant different-vendor interoperability.
“Those that leverage dbMotion report success after significant effort,” the KLAS authors wrote. “In the future, data exchange capabilities powered by dbMotion will be included with purchase of Sunrise.”
Users report each of the EHR vendors has pros and cons; as care organizations join the industry’s digital health transformation, choosing the right EHR technology is key.