Cerner offers their population health management software platform, HealtheIntent, their cloud-based data reconciliation and population stratification platform to provide a comprehensive population health management solution.
N/A
InterSystems HealthShare
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Connecting providers, patients, and payers through a unified care record and analytics that span the care continuum. Creates a Unified Care Record for Collaborative Care HealthShare creates a unified, community-wide health record as the foundation for coordinated, value-based care and population health management. With embedded intelligence, and delivery of just the right information at the right time and place within delivery, management, and payment processes, HealthShare enables…
Cerner HealtheIntent has been very reliable, as it hardly ever goes down. So it can be counted on. The end-user interface takes some time to get used to and could be better. Modules aren't always easy to find, making doing a certain task a bit cumbersome or taking more time to perform a task.
InterSystems HealthShare is an extremely powerful platform for which we have not found a need it cannot meet. Granted, some particular complex solutions may require a bit more 'engineering' level talent than some healthcare organizations staff in their traditional 'interface departments'. Organizations that make the investment in InterSystems AND their staff through training and empowerment of bettering their career will rapidly reap the rewards of a robust integration foundation with support for rapidly increasing the organization's ability to action their data using analytics, natural language processing, machine learning and business process orchestration. Through HealthShare, I have been able to harvest key business and clinical metrics rapidly from plain text blobs into discrete data elements, empowering our analytic users, reducing manual data entry and bettering the lives of our most important customer - the patient.
A wealth of specific integration adaptors provided with the product, allowing for rapid low-code integrations for a myriad of use-cases.
Most InterSystems provided functionality delivered with the product can be review and extended to allow for rapid development of custom solutions for adaptors and tools not met out-of-the-box.
Continual timely releases ensure organizations can keep up to date with the rapidly changing healthcare integration space, while trusting that upgrades do not mean months of testing and validation. Most major upgrades can be completed within a few weeks of simple unit testing.
Metadata management in HealtheIntent should be improved. For example, we could find similar looking data sources (for example, diagnosis tables with similar names) but it was hard to distinguish and know which one is the one in production. It was because several data stewards loaded the same table with a different purpose (with similar tables names). And HealtheIntent doesn't have a metadata "for a test" or "for development", which makes hard to manage versions of one data source.
To run a SQL in HealtheIntent, there is a time limit of only 10 minutes. Also, there is no delicate configuration of query execution. It may not need a lot of functions like Toad or SQL developer, but what HealtheIntent provides is very limited.
Similar to the one above, HealtheIntent may need better metadata management for users. It is hard to find a table that I need, even to find out the existence of the table. Basic statistics like the size of a table, # of rows may be helpful for users.
Improvements to built in REST, SOAP and FHIR adapters to allow for low-code solutions against modern integration web service APIs.
Terminology engine improvements to provide auto-mapping against the plethora of terminology datasets required by FHIR and US CDI standards.
Tighter integration with Git/GitHub and similar platforms to enable Continuous Integration and Development models out of the box not only for general developers but healthcare integrators.
Our organization had run Cerner EMR already so we only had a selection of adding HealtheIntent or not. There was no competitor. There are two aspects behind our decision: one is cost and the other is performance. We could save 50 full-time employee's expense to run our legacy analytics framework. I have no idea of details of the contract to buy and maintain HealtheIntent but generally speaking, it is saving money. Second, performances in terms of populating, processing data in HealtheIntent is way better than that of the legacy system.
InterSystems HealthShare is not your standard integration platform. While the Health Connect product could be construed as an 'interface engine', it is so much more. The capabilities to extend the engine using low code and visual business process modeling ensures a wealth of use cases not covered by a traditional interface engine. Furthermore, while not a direct competitor of Epic (Epic is in fact an InterSystems customer themselves), we are far more comfortable relying on the robustness of the HealthShare platform for complex integrations, data modeling and data normalization using HealthShare than just Bridges and Interconnect alone.
ROI may be depending on the contract. But even if an organization is spending the same money for either homegrown analytics or HealtheIntent, HealtheIntent provides more agility of project or cost spending. If you don't like it you can discontinue anytime.
The negative one is, HealtheIntent is a new product in Cerner and at this point, it may not be capable of everything like homegrown analytics. The question would be the future of HealtheIntent and will be able to cover what you need soon.
If an organization is pursuing a standard, generic analytics and reporting (such as the combination of Oracle and Tableau), HealtheIntent is great. If not (for example, running R and d3.js for specific cases), the cost of migration to HealtheIntent will skyrocket.
Simple integration development time has been reduced from weeks to days.
Complex integration development time has been reduced from months to weeks.
On-call Support after-hours for the integration team has been nearly non-existent since the move to InterSystems, increasing employee retention and satisfaction as InterSystems 'just works'.
Less need to purchase other products to implement complex integrations through web service APIs and SQL ETL processes - it can all be done with InterSystems.
