Health systems draw mainstream attention when they make the decision to implement a new EHR technology across their entire network, both inpatient and ambulatory.
Several large-scale health system EHR implementation are currently underway — Partners HealthCare and Mayo Clinic Epic EHRimplementations and the Department of Defense implementation of aCerner EHR solution.
Recently, a Boston Globe report shone negative light on the financial implications Partners is facing in part because of its Epic EHR selection.
The health system reported a $60-million drop in operating income between 2014 and 2015. Investment losses accounted for $37.5 million. The total cost of ownership for going with Epic Systems is reported to approach $200 million over three years — software, hardware, training, etc.
All the “losses” aside, Partners still netted $3 billion in revenue, a 6-percent improvement over the quarter.
The same report references the Brigham and Women’s Hospital Epic EHR implementation and the financial losses resulting from a loss in productivity and a reduced number patient visits.
Health system EHR implementations are costly endeavors, but there’s more to these implementations than large capital outlays. Industry leaders do not choose health IT infrastructure by chance. The decision-making process is deliberate and future-looking.
According to Definitive Healthcare, the Boston-based Partners recently generated $5.6 billion in net patient revenue ($17.27 billion in total patient revenue). Additionally, the health system maintains a high level of integration, an integrated delivery network that has received top honors for performance and quality in nationwide surveys.
