Vendors: did CCHIT Hurt or Help Your Sales?

 Just curious. Have the smaller guys gone out of business as feared? Have their sales ben impacted? What of the bigger companies?

I'd be really surprised if anyone will actually admit to poor sales lest they be branded as being "in trouble". There have been rumors that except for a select few, CCHIT has NOT helped increase sales.

 Rather than get into the insanity of giving our money to the EMRs who own CCHIT and the marketing craziness associated with CCHIT we simply "sat it out" CCHIT was doomed from the start. Instead we spent the money on improving our product and customer service - free markets always win vs. government intervention and control - We do live in a democratic, capitalist country and not a totalitarian, socialist country - right?

 I logged into Sermo and read a few of the EMR threads.  Seems CCHIT is being stressed, by those who don't know, as being an important feature in choosing an EMR.

 Sermo is not on the radar yet - I can't even remember when a doc even mentioned CCHIT, let alone asked about it. Funding has been cut to it and as far as I know only 8 vendors certified for 2007 (down from maybe 80 in 2006) Any for 2008 - I doubt it - goodbye CCHIT - nice to have had your aquaintance.

It is safe to say it certainly hasn't hurt..  I couldn't quantify it's benefit in hard numbers but I believe it got us into numerous opportunities we may not have had otherwise.  The fact there are fewer that have certified in 07 probably has more to do with more stringent requirements then anything else.  It certainly required alot of work and preparation.   www.purkinje.com

Yes. 

CEOMike:

 Sermo is not on the radar yet - I can't even remember when a doc even mentioned CCHIT, let alone asked about it. Funding has been cut to it and as far as I know only 8 vendors certified for 2007 (down from maybe 80 in 2006) Any for 2008 - I doubt it - goodbye CCHIT - nice to have had your aquaintance.

It's interesting that you say that - that is the second time I have heard that the CCHIT funding has dried up as of this year, so unless there is a mad rush from vendors to certify, CCHIT either will cease to exist or will be very scaled down to the point of irrelevance.  I would love to know from people in the 'know' if this is true.  From an outside view, the math suggested by the above scenario certainly makes sense - there is no way they can survive on 7 or 10 recerts this year.  Curiouser and curiouser as Alice would say.  This is a major reason why we have not applied for certification.

 And no, it has not hurt sales.  Maybe it will in the future, but then we can always reconsider our stance.  No point in certifying if there is a chance CCHIT may not be around.

Good morning all,

Following the CCHIT website to determine the true number of 2007 certified systems is difficult. While the 2007 link only has 8 certifications, if you look at the 2006 link, it will show that several vendors have certified for both 2006 and 2007 - just as CCHIT wanted.

Have a good day,

Dan 

danshelton:

Good morning all,

Following the CCHIT website to determine the true number of 2007 certified systems is difficult. While the 2007 link only has 8 certifications, if you look at the 2006 link, it will show that several vendors have certified for both 2006 and 2007 - just as CCHIT wanted.

Have a good day,

Dan 

Actually if you cross check the names on both lists, it is STILL exactly the same 8 EMRs who have certified in 2007.  So, the net number of EMRs that paid a fee and certified for CCHIT 2007 is STILL ONLY 8.  This does not look like a sufficient number to support CCHIT financially.  I would like someone to tell us differently if they have more information.

DrQuit:

 Just curious. Have the smaller guys gone out of business as feared? Have their sales ben impacted? What of the bigger companies?

 I agree with Joel, that there is no way - at least currently - to quantify what the effect has been. Among other things, it is just to soon to measure the real impact. I can tell you that since we often play in the larger end of the market, certification is a prerequisite for being considered. It also looks like purchasing a certified system is going to be a requirement for hospitals who are looking to roll out software for their practices under the Stark law relaxation scenario. I also agree with Joel, that the low number of those who have certified for '07 is more reflective of the fact that the '07 requirements are tougher and require more preparation and company commitment to complete. The other piece to consider is that the initial '06 certification is good for three years. I believe that some vendors are going to play on that fact and say they are "certified" for as long as the initial certification lasts and not mention that they haven't continued to certify every year. That will provide diminishing returns though for things like the Stark stuff, as my understanding is that the certification needs to be current year.

As for C-CHIT going away, I believe that is unlikely and maybe wishful thinking by some folks. If not C-CHIT then some other set of standards will be forthcoming. The market cannot support 300+ vendors who cannot be compelled to "prove" functional capabilities prior to purchase. As has been posted may times on this board by many people, the vast majority of physicians are technology neophytes or if conversant, technology consumers, not developers.  A good software demo person can take a very mediocre package and make it look very good indeed. Standards are some assurance that a certain minimum functionality exists. C-CHIT is a flawed approach, but probably no more flawed that any set of standards. Standards by definition are exclusionary and those that are excluded are always going to have a problem with their exclusion - sometimes with good reason.

opus313:

 The market cannot support 300+ vendors who cannot be compelled to "prove" functional capabilities prior to purchase. As has been posted may times on this board by many people, the vast majority of physicians are technology neophytes or if conversant, technology consumers, not developers.  A good software demo person can take a very mediocre package and make it look very good indeed. Standards are some assurance that a certain minimum functionality exists. C-CHIT is a flawed approach, but probably no more flawed that any set of standards. Standards by definition are exclusionary and those that are excluded are always going to have a problem with their exclusion - sometimes with good reason.

The problem is, and has always been, not the functionality of any given EMR but whether the basic design is useable. Nextgen, as I understand it  requires "a team" of sales/tech guys to show up at a docs office for "training" to get them going, hense Nextgen's price point and a focus on "the larger end of the market." So Nextgen is certified by CCHIT. Does that guarantee "the vast majority of physicians" who "are technology neophytes or if conversant, technology consumers" the ability to use Nextgen, quite the opposite. CCHIT certification makes it more likely they will not be able to use the EMR.

Medscribbler has all the features most docs need, but it is not "point and click" and does not rely on a terminology engine, we could add them but then the design is the same as all the other certified EMRs that 80% of the doc's have rejected over the years. It is not features that is problem it is useability of design. Nextgen recognized this fact - maybe long forgotten - in its design, as it does have some uniqueness but the world needs to move on to get the 80% to buy and use.

There are numerous EMRs that many docs are using very successfully that are not CCHIT certified, this should be a clear indicator that certification of features is not the answer. Why with all the money Nextgen spends on markeing and others like GE and Cerner together can so called little guys like Amazing Charts, no CCHIT, have more solo and  small practice installs than Nextgen. Medscribbler, no CCHIT, is starting to gain momentum as well because it works for "the vast majority of physicians" who "are technology neophytes or if conversant, technology consumers"  CCHIT does not guarantee useability only what a few think of as a list of features.

 Mike - I am not sure I would use what's happening in the marketplace as a clear indicator that certification is not needed. In fact, as time progresses and more is asked of an EMR, I think certification will be needed to "protect" the docs from erroneous choices ala good marketing materials and slick sales presentations.

 I guess I give docs more credit, computer neophytes or not.

The market is working, I come across very few docs now who want to buy and have not shopped around and understand basic terms and their wants. 

And what can I say I'm a free market type of guy. 

 But that's the point....the market is working today but the market is changing. By this I mean that we are in the early stages of EMR. As the landscape evolves from documentation to data management, the offices will need EMRs that can do that. It's like the early days of when computers were first used. The needs of today could not be met efficiently with those early machines.

Buyer beware....you need a company with leadership that can see what's coming!