Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and HIPAA for FREE!!

eClinicalWorks Settlement Hasn’t Led To Customer Defections, Yet

Posted on August 7, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she's served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

Loyalty is a funny thing. You’d think that when a vendor let you down spectacularly, you wouldn’t do business with them anymore. But the truth is, when it comes to health IT it’s not that simple. In many cases, vendor-customer relationships are more like marriages than formal agreements. Even if things start to go south, customers have so much invested in their vendor relationship that backing out may not seem like a realistic possibility.

Yes, I’m pontificating here, but not without a point. What I’m responding to here is a recent KLAS survey which found that while many customers of the now-tarnished eClinicalWorks have lost confidence in the company, many are still on board for now.

As many readers will know, in May eCW settled a whistleblower suit against the company for $155 million. The suit, which was brought by the US Department of Justice, asserted that the vendor got certified for incentive payments by putting deceptive kludges in place.

After agreeing to pay a massive penalty to the feds and putting a “Coprrporate Integrity Agreement” in place, it’s little wonder that some customers don’t trust eCW anymore. But the reality of the situation is that they’re not exactly free to jump ship either.

The study, which was reported on in HIT Consultant, found that 66% of customers polled by KLAS said their perception of eCW had moderately or significantly worsened after the settlement. Meanwhile, 34% of current eCW customers plan to look elsewhere when they make their next health IT investment.

Another third of respondents said they felt stuck in their current eCW contract, though they would consider switching vendors when the contract expires or they have more resources to invest. Still, only 4% of KLAS respondents said they were leaving specifically because of the settlement.

Meanwhile, there’s apparently a subset of eCW customers who aren’t that worried about the settlement or its implications. One-third of respondents said that it had little impact on them, and some noted that eCW is probably just the first of many vendors whose meaningful use certification will be called into question.

The reality is that while eCW customers were a bit shaken by the settlement, it didn’t exactly come as a shock that the vendor was playing it close to the edge, with one-fifth noting that the settlement was “unsurprising.”

I would tend to side with the eCW customers who predict that this settlement is the tip of the iceberg, and that it’s likely to come out that other health IT vendors were gaming the certification process. The question is whether these settlements will merely inconvenience providers or lead to serious problems of their own. If the feds ever decide that providers should have known about faked certifications, the game will get a lot more complicated.

eCW (eClinicalWorks) Settles Whistleblower Lawsuit for $155 Million

Posted on May 31, 2017 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

In many of my press panels and other discussions at the Healthcare IT Marketing and PR Conference, I’ve argued that there’s very little “Breaking News” when it comes to healthcare IT. Today is an example where this is not true. The news just broke that EHR vendor, eCW (eClinicalWorks), has settled a whistleblower lawsuit against them for $155 million.

The suit was filed by Brendan Delaney, a software technician formerly employed by the New York City Division of Health Care Access and Improvement, by his law firm Phillips & Cohen LLP against eClinicalWorks. eClinicalWworks and three of its founders (Chief Executive Officer Girish Navani, Chief Medical Officer Rajesh Dharampuriya, M.D., and Chief Operating Officer Mahesh Navani) are jointly liable for the payment of $154.92 million. Separately, Developer Jagan Vaithilingam will pay $50,000, and Project Managers Bryan Sequeira, and Robert Lynes will each pay $15,000. As a whistleblower, Delaney stands to receive $30 million of the settlement.

Here’s the summary of the complaints against eCW from the Justice Department’s press release about the settlement:

In its complaint-in-intervention, the government contends that ECW falsely obtained that certification for its EHR software when it concealed from its certifying entity that its software did not comply with the requirements for certification. For example, in order to pass certification testing without meeting the certification criteria for standardized drug codes, the company modified its software by “hardcoding” only the drug codes required for testing. In other words, rather than programming the capability to retrieve any drug code from a complete database, ECW simply typed the 16 codes necessary for certification testing directly into its software. ECW’s software also did not accurately record user actions in an audit log and in certain situations did not reliably record diagnostic imaging orders or perform drug interaction checks. In addition, ECW’s software failed to satisfy data portability requirements intended to permit healthcare providers to transfer patient data from ECW’s software to the software of other vendors. As a result of these and other deficiencies in its software, ECW caused the submission of false claims for federal incentive payments based on the use of ECW’s software.

Most people are writing about how eCW didn’t fully integrate the RxNorm codes, but instead hard coded the 16 codes that the certification process used. That’s embarrassing so it’s not a surprise that so many people are sharing that part of the story. However, I think the bigger part of the violation is probably around the data portability requirements. I bet a lot of EHR vendors are sweating right now as they look at the way they implemented those requirements. Not to mention the EHR audit logs which are poor in many EHR. Plus, the scariest claim is eClinicalWork’s inability to reliably record diagnostic imagine orders or perform drug interaction checks. Those are patient safety issues and exist in many EHR software.

If you want to dig into the weeds like I did, then you can see the government complaint against eClinicalWorks that was filed May 12, 2017 and the final settlement agreement with eClinicalWorks. Even more insightful was looking at the original complaint from Delaney against eClinicalWorks. Comparing the original whistleblower complaint to the government complaint against eClinicalWorks is very interesting. You’ll see that the government didn’t grab on to everything that was originally filed by Delaney. I imagine that’s a standard legal practice to file as many areas as possible and see what the government decides to use. It seems like Phillips & Cohen have represented a number of whistleblowers so I’m sure they were expert at this.

Girish Navani, CEO and Co-Founder or eClinicalWorks, offered this statement about the settlement:

“Today’s settlement recognizes that we have addressed the issues raised, and have taken significant measures to promote compliance and transparency. We are pleased to put this matter behind us and concentrate all of our efforts on our customers and continued innovations to enhance patient care delivery.”

Looking at the bigger picture, I’m certain that every EHR vendor is going through their EHR certification process and looking at all the statements they’ve made to make sure they’re not going to be in a similar situation. Not to mention the anti-kick back laws that were mentioned in the settlement. I’m sure there are other EHR vendors that are in violation of both of these items just as much as eCW.

Former ONC National Coordinator, Farrzad Mostashari seems to agree with me. Farzad tweeted, “Wow!! I hope this changes the attitude of the EHR vendor space more broadly.” Then, he later tweeted, “Let me be plain-spoken. eClinicalWorks is not the only EHR vendor who flouted certification /misled customers
Other vendors better clean up.”

Farzad then nailed it when he tweeted “There are a LOT of doctor’s office staff looking at their EHR today and wondering if there’s $30M worth of false promises hidden there”

I do wonder if Farzad Mostashari feels a little guilty of the role he played in this process since he oversaw such a porous EHR certification process. I’ve been against EHR certification for a long time because I thought it provided so little value to providers. The fact that it can be gamed by 16 codes being hard coded is a perfect example of why EHR Certification is a waste. Although, one could argue that without EHR certification, this suit would have never happened and maybe eClinicalWorks could still be selling the same product today.

I do find this quote from the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Vermont press release a little over the top (which I think is common on these things):

“Electronic health records have the potential to improve the care provided to Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, but only if the information is accurate and accessible,” said Special Agent in Charge Phillip Coyne of HHS-OIG. “Those who engage in fraud that undermines the goals of EHR or puts patients at risk can expect a thorough investigation and strong remedial measures such as those in the novel and innovative Corporate Integrity Agreement in this case.”

Another topic I haven’t seen anyone else cover is the impact that this settlement will have on eCW’s customers that used eCW to attest to meaningful use. Technically it shows that eCW wasn’t appropriately certified, so that means that they weren’t using a certified EHR and therefore shouldn’t have been eligible for meaningful use incentives. I asked one friend about this and he suggested that CMS had previously said that it would not hold eligible providers and eligible hospitals responsible for EHRs that calculated the meaningful use measures the wrong way. So, we’ll probably see this same approach with eCW users that got EHR incentive money on what we now know was not appropriately certified.

I was also intrigued by the Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) that eClinicalWorks entered into with HHS-OIG. There are a lot of details and oversight that eCW will get from OIG, but it also required eClinicalWorks to “allow customers to obtain updated versions of their software free of charge and to give customers the option to have ECW transfer their data to another EHR software provider without penalties or service charges. [emphasis added]”

Free updates is pretty clear and ironic since not wanting to update all their clients is one possible hypothesis for why they didn’t really push the proper upgrades. Hopefully all eCW users will do it now or they might be facing their own violations for using outdated software that has known clinical issues. However, the kicker in the CIA detail above is that eClinicalWorks has to give customers the option to have eClinicalWorks transfer their data to another EHR without penalty or service charges. I wonder how many will take them up on this requirement and what the details will be. I still wish this was required of all EHR vendors, but that’s a story for another day.

How many EHR vendor marketing groups are putting together their eClinicalWorks Rescue Plan to take in the downtrodden eCW users? I’m not sure these will be as successful as other EHR switching marketing efforts like those we see when an EHR is being shut down.

I’m sorry to say that I think this is likely only the beginning of such lawsuits. In fact, it’s probably already woken up a lot of potential whistle blowers. Hopefully it’s woken up a lot of EHR vendors as well.

Switching EHRs, The Trends And What To Consider

Posted on September 8, 2016 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

The following is a guest blog post by Winyen Wu, Technology and Health Trend Blogger and Enthusiast at Stericycle Communication Solutions as part of the Communication Solutions Series of blog posts. Follow and engage with them on Twitter: @StericycleComms
Winyen Wu - Stericycle
In recent years, there has been a trend in providers switching Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems: according to Software Advice, the number of buyers replacing EHR software has increased 59% since 2014. In a survey by KLAS, 27% of medical practices are looking to replace their EHR while another 12% would like to but cannot due to financial or organizational constraints. By 2016, almost 50% of large hospitals will replace their current EHR. This indicates that the current EHR products on the market are not meeting the needs of physicians.

What are the reasons for switching EHRs?

  • Complexity and poor usability: Many physicians find that it takes too many clicks to find the screen that they need, or that it is too time consuming to fill out all the checkboxes and forms required
  • Poor technical support: Some physicians may be experiencing unresponsive or low quality support from their EHR vendor
  • Consolidation of multiple EHRs: After consolidating practices, an organization will choose to use only one EHR as opposed to having multiple systems in place
  • Outgrowing functionality or inadequate systems: Some current EHRs may meet stage 1 criteria for meaningful use, but will not meet stage 2 criteria, which demand more from an EHR system.

Which companies are gaining and losing customers?

  • Epic and Cerner are the top programs in terms of functionality according to a survey by KLAS; cloud-based programs Athenahealth and eClinicalWorks are also popular
  • Companies that are getting replaced include GE Healthcare, Allscripts, NextGen Healthcare, and McKesson; 40-50% of their customers reported potential plans to move

What are providers looking for in choosing an EHR?

  • Ability to meet Meaningful Use standards/criteria: In September 2013, 861 EHR vendors met stage 1 requirements of meaningful use while only 512 met stage 2 criteria for certification, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services. Because stage 2 criteria for meaningful is more demanding, EHRs systems are required to have more sophisticated analytics, standardization, and linkages with patient portals.
  • Interoperability: able to integrate workflows and exchange information with other products
  • Company reliability: Physicians are looking for vendors who are likely to be around in 20 years. Potential buyers may be deterred from switching to a company if there are factors like an impending merger/acquisition, senior management issues, declining market share, or internal staff system training issues.

Is it worth it?
In a survey conducted by Family Practice Management of physicians who switched EHRs since 2010, 59% said their new EHRs had added functionality, and 57% said that their new system allowed them to meet meaningful use criteria, but 43% said they were glad they switched systems and only 39% were happy with their new EHR.

5 Things to consider when planning to switch EHRs

  1. Certifications and Compliance: Do your research. Does your new vendor have customers who have achieved the level of certification your organization hopes to achieve? Does this new vendor continually invest in the system to make updates with changing regulations?
  2. Customer Service: Don’t be shy. Ask to speak to at least 3 current customers in your specialty and around your size. Ask the tough questions regarding level of service the vendor provides.
  3. Interoperability: Don’t be left unconnected. Ensure your new vendor is committed to interoperability and has concreate examples of integration with other EHR vendors and lab services.
  4. Reliability and Longevity: Don’t be left out to dry. Do digging into the vendor’s financials, leadership changes and staffing updates. If they appear to be slimming down and not growing this is a sign that this product is not a main focus of the company and could be phased out or sold.
  5. Integration with Current Services: Don’t wait until it’s too late. Reach out to your current providers (like appointment reminders) and ensure they integrate with your new system and set up a plan for integrating the two well in advance.

The Communication Solutions Series of blog posts is sponsored by Stericycle Communication Solutions, a leading provider of high quality telephone answering, appointment scheduling, and automated communication services. Stericycle Communication Solutions combines a human touch with innovative technology to deliver best-in-class communication services.  Connect with Stericycle Communication Solutions on social media:  @StericycleComms

Never Sell Your EHR Company – According to eCW Founder

Posted on January 16, 2015 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I recently came across an interesting article in Entrepreneur magazine authored by Girish Navani, CEO and Co-founder of eClinicalWorks. If you read this site, you know doubt are familiar with the quite popular eCW EHR software. In this article Girish gives some interesting insight into the future of eCW as a company:

After grad school, I set out to create my own version of my father’s bridge. After working many odd jobs developing software, I created credit check software for an acquaintance’s business. This made him a lot of money, which prompted me to ask (perhaps naively) for a share of the profit. I had developed a very successful facet of the company – didn’t I deserve it? His response surprised me, but I will never forget it. He said, “If you build something you like, don’t sell it.”

Twenty years later, I still remember my acquaintance’s advice. For that reason, my company, eClinicalWorks is, and always will be, a privately-held company. I have no interest in selling it, regardless of any offer I may get. In addition, we don’t use investor cash or spend money we don’t have.

This is not a philosophy that is unique to eCW. #1 on Epic’s list of principles is “Do not go public.” I imagine that Judy Faulkner (CEO of Epic) has a somewhat similar philosophy to Girish. There are certainly a lot of advantages to not going public and most of them get down to control. I’ll never forget when I heard one of the Marriott children talk about their decision to stay a private company. He said that Marriott would likely be a lot bigger if they had become a public company, but they would have lost a lot of the company culture if they’d chose to do so.

I imagine this is a similar feeling that Epic and eCW share. However, there’s also some accountability that comes with being a public company as well. It’s not easy for an organization to assess the financial well being of a private company. During the golden age of EHR which we just experienced, that hasn’t been an issue for either eCW or Epic. However, as we exit this golden age of EHR that was propped up by $36 billion in government stimulus money, the financial future may be quite different.

As in most things in life, there are pros and cons to staying private or going public. It’s interesting that two of the major EHR players (eCW and Epic) have made it clear that they have no interest in ever going public. We’ll see how that plays out long term.

EMR Market Share

Posted on July 18, 2013 I Written By

James Ritchie is a freelance writer with a focus on health care. His experience includes eight years as a staff writer with the Cincinnati Business Courier, part of the American City Business Journals network. Twitter @HCwriterJames.

Editor’s Note: This is the first post on EMR and HIPAA by James Ritchie. James is a longtime journalist including the past eight years as a staff writer with the Cincinnati Business Courier.

Practice Fusion announced in June that it led the EMR industry in market-share gains.

Citing SK&A reports, the San Francisco-based firm boasted that it controlled 5.8 percent of the market as of May, up from 3.8 percent in July 2012. Beyond Practice Fusion, only Epic, AthenaHealth and Cerner showed gains.

In this data, which represents physician offices only, Allscripts was the market leader, with a 10.6 percent share. Not far behind were eClinicalWorks, with a 10.5 percent share, and Epic, with 10.3 percent. (The report that Practice Fusion links to is actually dated January 2013.)

But there’s more than one way to look at the EMR share picture.

Epic was the clear winner in a report by the Austin, Texas-based consultancy Software Advice on meaningful use attestations. Epic, based in Verona, Wis., accounted for 20.3 percent of attestations for a complete EHR in an ambulatory setting.

The firm’s competitors were nowhere close as of the March 2013 report. Allscripts was the system of choice for 11.6 percent of attestations by eligible professionals, and eClinicalWorks accounted for 8 percent. Next on the list were NextGen Healthcare, GE Healthcare and, with 2.7 percent share, Practice Fusion.

Software Advice claimed that the figures, based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, might be the best around. They at least provide a standard in a market where vendors “use varied criteria to calculate their customer base,” according to the company.

Companies “might count number of users (which could include everyone from physicians to administrative staff), number of medical providers (which could include everyone from physicians to midwives) or number of practices,” Software Advice noted on its website.

Practice Fusion, founded in 2005, claimed in its press release to have doubled both its monthly active user base of medical professionals and its patient population between 2012 and 2013. The company claims to reach “a community of 150,000 medical professionals serving 65 million patients.”

The prospects for the free model that Practice Fusion uses are still up in the air. Doctors might question whether they want ads, unobtrusive as they are at the bottom of the screen, to compete for their attention when they’re entering patient data. Data, by the way, might prove to be the real revenue generator for Practice Fusion. In June the firm launched Insight, an analytics product offering a population-level view of diagnoses, prescribing patterns and other information. It’s a model worth watching. If Facebook and google can build businesses on data, maybe Practice Fusion can, too.

The SK&A figures show just how fragmented the outpatient EMR/EHR market is. The top 10 vendors accounted for only 64.8 percent of attestations, leaving about 35 percent of the market to the “other” category. By Software Advice’s count, 560 firms logged at least one meaningful use attestation.

Eager to steal share are firms like Irvine, Calif.-based Kareo Inc. It launched its own free, cloud-based EHR in February based on technology acquired from San Mateo, Calif.-based Epocrates Inc. The firm reported in June that 4,000 providers had signed on, with a third of them moving from another EHR.

Of course, ambulatory adoption is only part of the EMR story.

Epic is No. 1 among the nearly 3,000 hospitals that have received federal incentives for using complete electronic records systems, according to Modern Healthcare. The company holds a 19.6 percent share, followed by Computer Programs and Systems Inc. with 15.5 percent, Meditech with 14.1 percent and Cerner with 11 percent. The late-May report was based on numbers from CMS and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

The inpatient market is far less fragmented than the outpatient space. The top 10 companies control 92 percent of share, according to the report.

No matter how you count share, the EMR space will continue to be hypercompetitive because of the dollars at stake. The market amounted to $20.7 billion in 2012, up 15 percent from 2011, according to the research firm Kalorama Information.

NBA Implements Cerner EHR – NFL Implements eCW

Posted on December 17, 2012 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Over the past couple weeks, a number of major athletic organizations have announced that they’re standardizing their healthcare documentation using EHR software. The NBA is using Cerner’s EHR and the NFL is using eCW’s EHR.

At first blush these announcements remind me of Walmart selling eCW at Sam’s Club and Costco selling Allscripts EHR. Everyone wondered why Costco and Sam’s Club were selling EHR. The obvious answer was that it was a great PR move by eCW and Allscripts. Although, I did hear about one doctor that hijacked an EHR selection process thanks to a Costco mailing. I think that’s the exception.

While big popular sports organizations like the NBA and eCW might be great PR for a company, it is really interesting to consider the unique healthcare needs of a sports league. The first thing that came to my mind was actually whether the teams would want to have their athletes’ health data on one platform. Often, the health of their players is part of their strategic advantage. Certainly there are a lot more rules about disclosure of injuries, but teams still play the injury card before games, in trades, and when signing new players. I imagine the staff doctors for the teams have to be careful how and what they document in the EHR if it’s going to be available to other teams. And we thought privacy was an issue in general EHR use. It’s much more complicated when you have millions of dollars riding on a player.

From a big data perspective, I’m interested to see if either of these leagues will be able to leverage the EHR data they collect in order to deal with the long term health issues of players. This is particularly true in the physically brutal NFL. I’m sure readers are familiar with the long term concussion questions and research that’s happening with the NFL. Not to mention the ongoing battle against the use of steroids and other performance enhancing drugs. Can a unified EHR help to provide a basis for research and understanding of the health consequences of playing in the NFL?

When I start to think about all the medical devices that are coming out, they’re really interesting in an NFL context as well. Imagine all the health data from various devices being sucked into the league’s EHR. When I talked with FitLinxx at the mHealth Summit, they said that the Boston Red Sox used their activity tracking device the year they won the World Series (Seems like Boston might want to consider using it again). From what they described, The Pebble (their activity tracking device) was a great way for the trainer to keep track of compliance with the fitness regiment they suggested. Should this data be in the league’s EHR? I can see health reasons to do so, but it does go back to the question of teams’ competitive advantages.

I bet device makers would love to compare professional athlete’s use of their devices against all of the other data that’s being collected by regular users. Would make for some pretty compelling charts if I could compare my health indicators against Lebron James or Peyton Manning.

What’s also interesting to consider about a major sports league using an EHR is a connected PHR. In these situations you want your players to be well connected to the doctor and you have a real financial interest in their compliance with doctors orders. PHR in this case could make a lot of sense. Although, I wonder if many prima donna athletes would balk at the idea. Well, at least they can have their agent or assistan log in for them.

I do wonder what special features Cerner and eCW were asked to do for the NFL and NBA. Of course, not much of it would likely be useful for the rest of us.

Meaningful Use EHR Breakout by Percentage

Posted on June 20, 2012 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

I’ve seen a bunch of different websites listing the top 10 EHR vendors based on physicians who attested to meaningful use using their EHR software. This list is certainly interesting and worthy of a discussion. However, I think it’s also important to put these numbers in some context. Remember that these numbers are just for the ambulatory EHR space. The Hospital EHR numbers are a different story which I’ll probably cover on Hospital EMR and EHR.

Here are the EHR incentive numbers by EHR vendor and also the percentage of meaningful use attestations they had (Thanks to Dr. Rowley for the numbers):

EHR Vendor MU Attestations Percentage
Epic 11075 23%
Allscripts 5743 12%
eCW 4057 8%
NextGen 2237 5%
GE 2002 4%
Athena 1733 4%
Greenway 1650 3%
Cerner 1375 3%
MEDENT (Previously Community Computer Service) 1264 3%
e-MDs 1235 3%
Practice Fusion 1156 2%
Sage 1140 2%
Other EHRs (272) 14358 29%

As Dr. Rowley points out in his post, Epic is the largest vendor on the list, but they don’t market or sale their product to independent clinics or even independent physician groups. Epic’s ambulatory EHR is found in owned or affiliated clinics who use the ambulatory piece of the EHR an Epic hospital buys. So, the above Epic number actually provides an insight into how many ambulatory practices are associated with Epic using hospitals.

The numbers tell an interesting story if you take Epic out of the mix:

EHR Vendor MU Attestations Percentage
Allscripts 5743 15%
eCW 4057 11%
NextGen 2237 6%
GE 2002 5%
Athena 1733 5%
Greenway 1650 4%
Cerner 1375 4%
MEDENT (Previously Community Computer Service) 1264 3%
e-MDs 1235 3%
Practice Fusion 1156 3%
Sage 1140 3%
Other EHRs (272) 14358 38%

Once you take out the hospital dominance in the ambulatory market, the EHR market share for any one EHR vendor is quite small. In fact, the other EHR vendor category has 38% of the EHR market. The long tail of EHR software is definitely at play right now.

Plus, we have to be really careful using meaningful use attestation as a proxy for the EHR market. I recently saw a figure that only 20% of the ambulatory EHR market had attested to meaningful use. That’s right, the above numbers only represent 20% of the ambulatory market.

If my math is correct, that still leaves almost 200,000 providers that aren’t represented in the above analysis of 50k providers. Imagine an EHR vendor comes along that’s so great that they quickly capture only 20% of the 200,000 uncounted providers (no small feat). That would give them about 40,000 providers and using the above numbers they would have 45% of the EHR market (including Epic).

Of course, the current EHR vendors will continue to sale EHR software and many will switch EHR software vendors during that time as well. Plus, no doubt many of those who haven’t attested to meaningful use already have an EHR, but aren’t represented in the numbers above. They just either don’t care about meaningful use and EHR incentive money or they’re still working to get to the point where they can attest to meaningful use. However, I still think the above numbers illustrate that there’s plenty of opportunity available for an upstart EHR company to get plenty of EHR market share.

It’s going to be an exciting next couple years as we watch all of this shake out. We’ll take a look back at this post in a few years to see how far we’ve come.

The Commodity EMR, EMR Adoption and Other EMR Tweets

Posted on October 30, 2011 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Time to go through some interesting Tweets from the world of EMR and EHR.

@glevin1 – gary levin
Commodization of EMR | HealthWorks Collective

There was a link on this tweet too, but it looked like a link to a page that stole the content from the original article. I’ve been intrigued by the question of whether EMR is a commodity software or not for a while now. I still haven’t come to a firm conclusion. This article uses the idea that you can buy Allscripts MyWay at Costco as a way to say that EMR is a commodity. You can also buy eCW at Sam’s Club I believe. Although, as best I can tell, that was basically a PR move on the various EHR vendors part.

Also, the article says that Allscripts MyWay product came from the purchase of Misys. Actually, I think MyWay was originally Aprima. I believe the Misys EHR software is set to be sunset.

What do you think? Is EMR a commodity?

@BrianSMcGowan – Brian S. McGowan PhD
Percent of US PCPs using EMR = 17% in ’00’ – 28% in ’06’ – 46% in ’09’ (vs 99% in Netherlands) #socialQI #progress??

The link on this one was to a terribly long PDF file. So, I cut it out. I just wish I knew where Brian got his numbers. I call BS on the US having 46% EHR adoption in 2009. I still put us at about 25% EHR adoption now. Maybe a little higher if I’m being generous. Of course, a lot of people define EHR a lot of different ways. So, that might be part of the issue.

@DRZORBA – Zorba Paster
Back to the clinic. Everyone brings their records with them. No EMR here. If they lose their record then they’re @*%&M.

Hmm…imagine a world where the doctor didn’t keep any record. The patient was just responsible for the record. That idea is fraught with trouble and issues, but I bet many doctors would love to not have to worry about the records part of their job.

@medreccom – Medical Records
“Paper is dangerous and inefficient, it doesn’t belong in health care any longer.” Future of #EMR: on.mash.to/uhVkHn

I was interested in this tweet since it linked to an article on Mashable (a mainstream tech site). So, if I get this right, this article and series was sponsored (ie. paid for) by Lenovo and profiles Practice Fusion. In other words, Lenovo paid to advertise Practice Fusion on Mashable. Good for Practice Fusion. Although, I’m not sure how many doctors read Mashable. Maybe the article wasn’t about finding doctors, but was a way to find more tech people to come work at Practice Fusion. The article itself is pretty basic for someone that reads this site. Not a bad play if that was the intent. Full Disclosure: Practice Fusion advertises on this site. Although, they certainly didn’t pay me to write about this and link to it.

Dell EMR

Posted on September 10, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Today, CNET posted an article that talked about a Dell EMR. Yes, we’re talking about the Dell that makes computers (and sells everything else under the sun).

We’ve known for a while about Dell’s partnership with eCW and Walmart-Sam’s Club to sell EHR, but the thing that’s interesting about the CNET article is that it calls it “Dell’s EMR software.” I’m certain that Dell didn’t create it’s own EMR software package. I assume it has to just be eCW’s EMR right?

To add to the fun, I even found the page http://www.dell.com/emr which talks about Dell’s foray into the EMR world. However, on that page it links to the Sam’s Club/Walmart/eCW EHR partnership as well.

I have a feeling that the CNET article is just an extension of Dell’s partnership with eCW and Walmart. I’m sure eCW wants to market their EHR as much as possible and Dell is a respected brand on which to market your product.

UPDATE: The following is an excerpt from Healthcare IT News about the Dell EMR:

The Round Rock, Texas-based computer maker on Thursday introduced an electronic medical record system for hospital-affiliated physician practices. The intent, said Dell executives, is to accelerate the sharing and meaningful use of digital patient information among hospitals and physician practices.

Dell executives say their EMR solution is sponsored by hospitals for their affiliated physicians and designed to make it affordable and practical for physician practices to transition from paper to electronic records.

So, it looks like it’s hospitals that will choose to partner with Dell in order to get doctors to buy an EMR from Dell? It still doesn’t say where Dell got this EMR. I think we can rule out them developing their own. So, the question remains: Is this an extension of the partnership with eCW or did Dell purchase another EMR software company?

In summary, a doctor will be buying an EMR sponsored by their hospital association who has an associate with Dell who has an association with some EMR software? Sounds like the perfect recipe for finger pointing.

Sam’s Club Listing for eCW and Dell EMR Package

Posted on May 8, 2009 I Written By

John Lynn is the Founder of the HealthcareScene.com blog network which currently consists of 10 blogs containing over 8000 articles with John having written over 4000 of the articles himself. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 16 million times. John also manages Healthcare IT Central and Healthcare IT Today, the leading career Health IT job board and blog. John is co-founder of InfluentialNetworks.com and Physia.com. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can also be found on Twitter: @techguy and @ehrandhit and LinkedIn.

Many of you may remember my rather detailed coverage of the impact of Walmart offering an EMR through Sam’s Club and in partnership with eClinicalWorks and Dell. For those that missed my comments, I wrote about the details of the Walmart EMR offering, and then A Doctor’s Perspective on Walmart EMR and eCW and Dell’s perspective on Walmart EMR.

I saw the Walmart EMR listing on the Sam’s Club website a while back, but didn’t have a chance to post it. It’s really interesting to see an EMR listed at Sam’s Club. I also find it interesting to see that they chose to market it as an EMR and not an EHR. I think this actually is a pretty smart move since I think most doctors still call it an electronic medical record or EMR. Those of us in the industry sometimes get caught up in the difference between EMR and EHR, but I think doctors don’t really care about the difference.

I still don’t think that this is much more than the opportunity for eCW and Dell to market their products. However, it is really interesting to see an attempt to commoditize the price of an EMR. As I look through the prices, I think that anyone that tries to buy this package through Sam’s Club is going to be hit by a bunch of hidden costs. Everything from the cost of travel for the eCW trainers to the upgraded hardware support from Dell. At the end of the day, I don’t think it will save doctors anything.

Turns out that the website states: “Availability of this offering is currently limited to Virginia, Illinois, and Georgia with anticipated nationwide coverage by the end of the year” I’d love to hear from someone who has taken the bait and purchased the Walmart EMR from Sam’s Club.