KLAS: EMRs' true costs are higher than expected
The EMR purchasing process has matured, there are fewer EMR pioneers and buyers are savvier; so today's EMR projects aren't likely to go way over budget, according to a report from healthcare market research firm KLAS. However, EMR customers may face unexpected costs down the line.
Unexpected costs, physician usability issues, missed delivery dates, vendor response time, stability and workflow interruptions all play a role in the true cost of owning an EMR system, the Orem, Utah-based company stated.
KLAS examined 146 healthcare organizations' recent buying experiences, looking at elements involved in the true cost of EMR ownership, such as scope, how well the vendor kept its promises, cost surprises and physician/clinician adoption. Klas found that Epic is the only vendor with high ratings for money’s worth, contracting and costs—and Epic projects have the largest scope of any vendor, according to the report.
Meditech clients reported little variation from what they expected compared to what they received in the Meditech contract, delivery and post-live selling events; however, clients cited Meditech’s lack of proactive help in getting their money’s worth, KLAS stated.
Meditech was found to be most consistently within or under budget delivering its product, with Epic a close second. Cerner, Eclipsys, McKesson (mainly Horizon clients but with several Paragon included) and Siemens Healthcare were tightly grouped in the second tier, the report stated.
In terms of computerized physician order entry (CPOE), “some of the less-expensive EMR adoptions may sacrifice depth of CPOE to keep costs low,” KLAS stated. “Deep physician adoption typically has a major budget impact and requires significant investment.”
Getting past general clinical use to deep CPOE adoption typically requires significant additional staffing, vendor and consultant costs, according to the report.
Unexpected costs, physician usability issues, missed delivery dates, vendor response time, stability and workflow interruptions all play a role in the true cost of owning an EMR system, the Orem, Utah-based company stated.
KLAS examined 146 healthcare organizations' recent buying experiences, looking at elements involved in the true cost of EMR ownership, such as scope, how well the vendor kept its promises, cost surprises and physician/clinician adoption. Klas found that Epic is the only vendor with high ratings for money’s worth, contracting and costs—and Epic projects have the largest scope of any vendor, according to the report.
Meditech clients reported little variation from what they expected compared to what they received in the Meditech contract, delivery and post-live selling events; however, clients cited Meditech’s lack of proactive help in getting their money’s worth, KLAS stated.
Meditech was found to be most consistently within or under budget delivering its product, with Epic a close second. Cerner, Eclipsys, McKesson (mainly Horizon clients but with several Paragon included) and Siemens Healthcare were tightly grouped in the second tier, the report stated.
In terms of computerized physician order entry (CPOE), “some of the less-expensive EMR adoptions may sacrifice depth of CPOE to keep costs low,” KLAS stated. “Deep physician adoption typically has a major budget impact and requires significant investment.”
Getting past general clinical use to deep CPOE adoption typically requires significant additional staffing, vendor and consultant costs, according to the report.