Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital Recognized as HIMSS Stage 7 | Healthcare Informatics Magazine | Health IT | Information Technology Skip to content Skip to navigation

Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital Recognized as HIMSS Stage 7

April 13, 2018
by Heather Landi
| Reprints
Click To View Gallery

Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital (MLKCH), a private, non-profit hospital serving South Los Angeles, has achieved the highest level of electronic medical record system use—Stage 7—developed by HIMSS Analytics.

At the end of 2017, only 6.4 percent of hospitals in the U.S. had reached Stage 7. Even before the new hospital was opened in 2015, its sophisticated electronic medical record (EMR) system was envisioned as an essential tool for delivering on its promises of quality care, easier access to care, and improvement of the community’s health, according to MLKCH officials.

"Our information technology is a foundational component of the hospital’s ability to deliver on its mission to provide compassionate, collaborative, quality care and improve the health of our community," Dr. Elaine Batchlor, CEO of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Hospital, said in a statement.

In the hospital’s service area, the community faces a shortage of 1,200 physicians. In the 2017 Los Angeles County Department of Public Health “Key Indicators of Health” report, adults in the hospital’s service area reported the greatest difficulty accessing healthcare. Implementing an advanced electronic medical record system at the new community hospital was a strategic choice. With an advanced EMR, the hospital can coordinate patient health information with all a patient's providers, reducing the need for patients to travel to unnecessary or repetitive appointments and creating a collaborative, connected system of care.

In announcing the Stage 7 validation to the hospital’s leadership, Regional Director North America for HIMSS Analytics, Philip Bradley, said, “MLKCH is a shining example of what an organization can achieve if they have the team, support, and dedication. We were impressed with their focus on improving clinical quality for the community they serve.”

MLKCH opened in July 2015 as an all-digital hospital with a state-of-the-art technology infrastructure in place. It was recognized by HIMSS as Stage 6 in its first year of operations.

“Getting to Stage 7 is a tremendous achievement and doing so less than three years after opening in an underserved community is even more remarkable,” Tracy Donegan, chief information and innovation officer of MLKCH, said in a statement. “Our technical innovations aren’t in place for bragging rights, however. They’re strategic investments that allow us to deliver high-quality care and protect the safety of our patients.”

“Our patients will greatly benefit from the systems and processes we have put in place,” Batchlor said. “We’re proud to be a model for how community hospitals can compete with the technical innovations of large health systems.”


The Health IT Summits gather 250+ healthcare leaders in cities across the U.S. to present important new insights, collaborate on ideas, and to have a little fun - Find a Summit Near You!


KLAS Report: Behavioral Health EHR Vendors Demonstrate Poor Performance

October 10, 2018
by Heather Landi, Associate Editor
| Reprints

The behavioral health electronic health record (EHR) vendor market has shown poor performance, to date, according to customers, who cite slow development, implementation challenges and lackluster customer support, according to a KLAS Research report.

A recent KLAS report examines behavioral health EHR performance, based on interviews with 149 unique organizations to get their perspective on the performance of these solutions. According to the organizations interviewed, the settings in which behavioral health EHRs are used are primarily outpatient/private practice (78 percent); intensive outpatient/residential day program (64 percent); inpatient residential treatment center (42 percent) and acute psychiatric services (22 percent).

The report, KLAS’ first on behavioral health EHRs, is intended to give executives at behavioral health organizations a high-level overview of the market and to shine a spotlight on where vendors can improve. Specifically, the report dives into the behavioral health vendors used most frequently (in both inpatient and outpatient settings) and their performance in product quality, development, and service and support. 

Organizations who offer behavioral health services need robust IT solutions that can support their efforts, however, on average, the overall performance of behavioral health vendors is very low. According to KLAS, the average overall score for behavioral health vendors is 70.8 (out of 100), putting behavior al health in the second percentile of all software market segments that KLAS measures (about 100 total).

Several factors contribute to this low performance, KLAS researchers note in the report. Organizations’ needs vary greatly based on the types of services they offer and the states they operate in, and this latter factor specifically impacts reporting. What’s more, a one-size-fits-all solution isn’t adequate for most organizations. Also, behavioral health vendors often overcommit on what they can deliver and are slow to develop the functionality organizations need and request.

According to KLAS “While vendor performance is low across the board, most frustrated customers plan to stay with their behavioral health vendor due to limited resources and a lack of compelling alternatives,” the researchers wrote.

Among the vendor solutions covered in the report are Cerner’s Community Behavioral Health solution, Cerner’s Millennium Behavioral Health, Core Solutions, Credible, Harris Healthcare, Netsmart, Qualifacts, Valant and Welligent.

Credible, a Rockville, Md.-based vendor that provides web-based EHR software for behavioral health providers, is leading what, so far, is an underperforming segment with wide variation, according to the report. KLAS researchers also note that Valant, a Seattle-based company that behavioral health HER software, is strong among private practices.

“Credible and Valant manage to give their customers a more consistent experience,” the report authors wrote. “Of the vendors used broadly in both outpatient and inpatient settings, Credible is most consistent thanks to their stronger implementation and training process, which has helped most customers find success with the easy-to-use, cloud-based system. Valant, whose customers are mostly private practices, also has an easy-to-use product, which was designed by a licensed psychiatrist. Valant’s multi-pronged approach to training (which includes a train-the-trainer program as well as online tools, such as webinars and blogs) helps private practices feel they get good value for their money.”

Despite the challenges, few are planning to replace, KLAS notes. One CIO interviewed for the report said, “Our CEO was considering other options a while ago. That person spends every spare minute trying to figure out what is best for us, and the CEO's research suggested that there really isn't anything better than [our current EHR] on the market.”

KLAS researchers also found that most behavioral health vendors have been slower to develop than customers would like or have failed to keep development promises. “Missed development timelines are referenced by almost all customers who say their vendor hasn’t kept promises,” the report authors wrote. “Even Credible, the overall top-performing behavioral health vendor, has overcommitted on timelines, specifically for new treatment-planning and state-reporting functionality.”

Cerner is the most mature of the enterprise health system EHR vendors when it comes to behavioral health, according to the report. Cerner has been developing their go-forward Millennium platform and incorporating learnings and content from their acquired Anasazi product (renamed Community Behavioral Health).

KLAS researchers found that overall customer satisfaction with the two products is comparable. In regard to Millennium, health system clients report higher satisfaction; relatively strong support and previously unattainable benefits, like integration across service lines, make up for product inadequacies mentioned by some behavioral health–specific Millennium customers.

Looking at other health system EHR vendors, Meditech has customers live with their integrated behavioral health solution, though adoption is light to date. Epic recently released a behavioral health–specific module, but no customers were yet live at the time of this research. Several of Epic’s inpatient EHR customers say they would have to pay an additional fee for the behavioral health module, according to the report.

Allscripts has no specific platform for behavioral health and recently sold their stake in Netsmart, making them the only EHR vendor—among those in use at large health systems—with no behavioral health–specific solution, the report authors state.

More From Healthcare Informatics


Survey: Half of Providers Use Multiple CDS Solutions, Use Varies by Provider

October 9, 2018
by Heather Landi, Associate Editor
| Reprints

While three-fourths of providers currently use some sort of clinical decision support (CDS) solution, more than half are using multiple solutions, which indicates there is still not one solution that is meeting all of providers’ needs, according to a Reaction Data survey.

Reaction Data, a market research firm focused on the healthcare and life sciences industries, surveyed 180 healthcare physicians to gauge adoption of clinical decision support systems. Thirty-one percent of respondents hold the title of chief medical officer and 13 percent are chief medical information officers (CMIO) and another 13 percent are quality directors. The remaining respondents were chief nursing officers (CNOs), clinical informatics directors, health information management directors and IT directors. The majority of participants (91 percent) come from acute facilities with just 9 percent from ambulatory facilities.

The survey examines the main use cases for clinical decision support and the major vendors in the space, both as a full functioning system, and those who contribute to the early stages of a full CDS strategy. Three-fourths of respondents (74 percent) reported that they currently use a clinical decision support system.

On the clinical side, the number one use case for clinical decision support is medication orders, with 30 percent of respondents reporting CDS for this purpose, followed by lab orders (24 percent) and medical imaging orders (20 percent).

Cerner currently holds about 25 percent of the CDS market, according to the report. EPSi (Allscripts) has a 14 percent market share, Epic has an 11 percent market share and Stanson Health has six percent of the market. Many other vendors holding about five percent market share, including Nuance, Premier, Truven (IBM), Elsevier, Zynx Health and NDSC (Change).

These survey results on the clinical side of CDS indicate that the majority of people turn to their EHR vendor to provide the support they need. “After moving past the larger EHR providers in the market, you see companies like Stanson Health who offer a full CDS start to show up.

The report findings also illustrate that most vendors are in the early stages of their CDS strategy, as only 12 percent of the vendors listed by respondents offer a full CDS solution. About half of respondents offer an electronic health record (EHR) solution and 37 percent offer CDS as a secondary component.

Just slightly more than half (55 percent) of respondents said they currently use multiple solutions or components for their CDS needs rather than one system. For example, a provider might use one solution for aiding in drug ordering, and another solution for their clinical needs.

Of those currently using multiple solutions about half of that group said they plan to continue using multiple solutions moving forward, which indicates that there still is not one solution that meets all of respondents’ CDS needs. Looking at future plans, about a quarter of respondents plan to standardize on one platform and another quarter of respondents said they are unsure what their organization’s plans are.

“With only a 9 percent replacement rate everyone seems to be staying put for the most part. From our commentary, it appears clinicians are either satisfied with their current vendor, or are just holding out until they find a solution that meets all (or close to all) of their needs,” the report authors wrote.

The report authors also note there is room for growth in the clinical CDS market. “Things like real-time data mining in connection with decision support can improve clinicians’ views of the usefulness of the product. Others feel it’s helpful, but only for training purposes, the idea being that as time goes on you start to derive the same conclusions as your CDS solution,” the report authors wrote.

Related Insights For: EHR


How to Harness Your Hospital System Data via Advanced Content Management

Tuesday, November 13, 2018 | 1:00 p.m. ET, 12:00 p.m. CT

For years, healthcare institutions have attempted to manage paper documents and electronically captured PDF files. These documents can be electronically stored in various databases like EHRs, ERPs for Human Resources and Materials Management, surgery systems, and accounts payable systems. Until now, it was extremely difficult to capture and store discrete reportable data from these files. Data builds “knowledge,” so it’s important to have the ability to access reporting data from such files, without increasing the workload of hospital staff.

This session will highlight various case studies illustrating how Advanced Content Management can help healthcare institutions reduce paper and PDF file handling, to:

See more on EHR