Healthcare: Electronic Health Record Software Solutions Report

This report provides an analysis of Electronic Health Record (EHR) software solutions, focusing on five prominent vendors: Epic, Athenahealth, CureMD, eClinicalWorks, and Kareo. The report highlights the key features of each vendor, including their strengths, weaknesses, and user reviews. The selection of these vendors is justified based on factors such as usability, market presence, and third-party ratings like KLAS Research. Furthermore, the report outlines the essential criteria for a Request for Information (RFI) and Request for Proposal (RFP), emphasizing the importance of demonstrations, presentations, testing, and installation processes in the vendor selection. The report also discusses the significance of third-party ratings, site visit feedback, and user interviews in evaluating vendors. Finally, the report delves into the details of pricing models and contracts, including contractual duration, early termination costs, support fees, upgrade fees, and service-level agreements, providing a comprehensive overview for informed decision-making in EHR software selection.

Running head: HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student
Name of the Organization
Author Note

1HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
Epic
Epic is mainly EHR solution based upon cloud which is capable of catering to a huge
number of specialists. This particular vendor has been chosen as this particular software is seen
to be greatly used across a wide range of practices starting from all the community hospitals to
all multi-speciality groups of hospital as well as providers of hospice care (Arndt et al., 2017). It
offers a standard range of all the main EHR features and it has a very strong focus upon the
engagement of patient. It also emphasizes easy integration with all the third party systems.
Consecutively for about five years, the throne for the best EHR is known to be occupied by Epic
as per the KLAS ratings (Makam et al., 2014). This particular software is implemented quickly,
highly interoperable and is very much easy to use.
Athenahealth
Athenahealth is a great software which has been designed especially for the workflow of
huge practices and may not have the best experience of the users for the smaller ones. It has been
ranked by KLAS as #1 as per usability of the platform streamlines based upon clouds which the
patients mostly encounters are considered (Adler-Milstein & Huckman, 2013). It has received
several good reviews about 3.5/5 from several customers and it has become the leading provider
of the services based upon cloud for HER, cycle management of revenue as well as medical
billing and engagement of patient. This vendor has been chosen as it has been observed to be
connecting care and driving several meaningful results for around more than 100,000 providers
of health care in systems of health worldwide.

2HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
CureMD
CureMD has the capability of providing both HER as well as PM solutions in a suite
which will be bundled and it will be associated with a service of billing which uses their personal
clearinghouse in-house (Joshi, Joshi & Finin, 2018). This particular vendor has been chosen as it
has about 109,000 users across 44 states who are completely satisfied and also comprises of
about 33 specialists. Due to this, their EHR has uplifted the bar of usability. It guarantees for an
advanced functionality of the enterprise at a friction of the expense which is charged by some
other vendors with an availability of support for 24/7. It has been ranked by KLAS as No1
especially for the usability of it. CureMD is seen to be having one of the lowest times of the
resolution of issue in the industry. It has received very good rating of reviews from the customers
(4.1/5).
eClinicalWorks
eClinicalWorks is mainly a vendor which is held privately in the IT solutions of
ambulatory healthcare. Their expense which is affordable has made it an ideal choice for all the
practices which are small in size. The solution of it caters for about more than 40 specialists who
links the medical records of the patient for billing as well as claiming information. It has a huge
number of providers as well as healthcare professionals across 50 different states (Wang et al.,
2014). The expense is per provider and there is an option named Scribe which is available for the
providers with the help of which they can use a service of voice to text for dictating their notes of
progress.

3HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
Kareo
Kareo has the capability of offering an EHR which is mostly based upon cloud,
management of practice as well as solutions of RCM. This particular vendor has been chosen
because it has been ranked #1 for three times in a row by the ratings of (Black Book Sánchez &
Demurjian, 2016). It has been able to hold the Award of North American Physician Practice
Management Customer Value Enhancement. It is actually the firm’s free of cost HER which is
specially designed for all provider practices which are small where a number of providers can
easily schedule appointments, access data of the patient and also create note of the provider with
only a fewer number of clicks. The solution which is provided by Kareo is very much user
friendly and is clearly customized as per each speciality. It has been able to receive high ratings
about 4.2/5. This particular company boasts a huge number of providers with the help of their
respective services as well as products. The solution which is provided by this particular firm is
even intuitive.

4HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
References
Adler-Milstein, J., & Huckman, R. S. (2013). The impact of electronic health record use on
physician productivity. The American journal of managed care, 19(10 Spec No), SP345-
52.
Arndt, B. G., Beasley, J. W., Watkinson, M. D., Temte, J. L., Tuan, W. J., Sinsky, C. A., &
Gilchrist, V. J. (2017). Tethered to the EHR: primary care physician workload assessment
using EHR event log data and time-motion observations. The Annals of Family
Medicine, 15(5), 419-426.
Joshi, M., Joshi, K., & Finin, T. (2018). Attribute Based Encryption for Secure Access to Cloud
Based EHR Systems. UMBC Information Systems Department Collection.
Makam, A. N., Lanham, H. J., Batchelor, K., Moran, B., Howell‐Stampley, T., Kirk, L., ... &
Halm, E. A. (2014). The good, the bad and the early adopters: providers' attitudes about a
common, commercial EHR. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 20(1), 36-42.
Sánchez, Y. K. R., & Demurjian, S. A. (2016). Towards user authentication requirements for
mobile computing. In Innovative Solutions for Access Control Management (pp. 160-
196). IGI Global.
Wang, J. J., Cha, J., Sebek, K. M., McCullough, C. M., Parsons, A. S., Singer, J., & Shih, S. C.
(2014). Factors related to clinical quality improvement for small practices using an
EHR. Health services research, 49(6), 1729.