Getty Images

KLAS Ranks Hospice Health IT Vendors for Customer Satisfaction, Value

The KLAS report found that hospice solutions from health IT vendors MatrixCare and WellSky were best for supporting independent hospice agencies.

Across hospice health IT vendors, customers want more hospice-specific clinical workflows, according to a KLAS report.

The report found that Netsmart and Homecare Homebase customers report little engagement from health IT vendor leadership regarding hospice care, leading the vendor not to prioritize needed functionality.

Interviewed Netsmart customers noted that a lack of third-party integrations hinders collaboration across interdisciplinary care teams. The report also revealed that Homecare Homebase customers want more developments outside of meeting regulatory needs.

WellSky Hospice & Palliative (Consolo) users appreciate that the vendor built the system specifically for hospice, unlike others in the market that organizations describe as primarily made for home health. Still, these customers pointed to the need for further health IT optimization.

The KLAS authors said that most hospice organizations have grown even more financially strained since the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing expectations for health IT vendors to deliver more value for the cost.

WellSkyHospice (Kinnser) and Netsmart customers decreasingly report that their vendor delivers good value. MatrixCare customers reported a higher sense of value but still want fewer ad hoc costs for additional modules.

Homecare Homebase scores low for customers saying they are getting their money’s worth. However, the vendor retains a strong market position because many large independent agencies feel there are no other viable options for their organization’s size.

WellSky Hospice & Palliative users said the solution’s clinical and revenue cycle functionality helps drive efficiency.

Epic’s health system-owned customers noted satisfaction with enterprise platform integration. On the other hand, hospice end users reported more issues with clinical workflows (related to remote client use) and rated the vendor lower for money’s worth.

The report noted that fax remains the primary transfer tool for patients moving to hospice care. While vendors have developed referral management tools, they have yet to improve efficiency for most organizations, and interoperability challenges remain.

Specifically, Netsmart users are frustrated over the lack of bidirectional interfacing for data sharing and the cost of interfaces.

Some MatrixCare customers said they don’t use the vendor’s referral platform because it costs extra. Those who do say data transitions easily between MatrixCare modules.

Epic customers mentioned the product’s strong data exchange when sending acute care patients to hospice. However, transitions with non-Epic facilities lack this level of integration.

Most Homecare Homebase respondents feel that third-party data is easy to access when the sender is an approved vendor partner. Several users pointed out difficulties transitioning from home health to hospice and said medication data does not always cross over correctly.

Next Steps

Dig Deeper on Health IT optimization

Cloud Computing
Mobile Computing