UK Interoperability Jeremy Goff © Copyright KLAS 2016

Interoperability in the U.S. KLAS Overview Interoperability in the U.S. UK Interoperability Study Join The Effort © Copyright KLAS 2016

WHO IS KLAS? © Copyright KLAS 2016

KLAS Influence 3,100 Healthcare customer executives (VP & C-Level) who actively participate by sharing their experience and benefit from accessing KLAS data/reports. KLAS is entirely dedicated to improving healthcare, including the worldwide provider market, payer market, and helping vendors perform better for their clients. 4,500 Healthcare organizations worldwide represented in the KLAS data through the participation of their employees each year who share their voice/experience. 25,000+ Interviews conducted each year. 90%+ are person-to-person interviews with current customers. 750 Healthcare IT products and services measured by KLAS. 200 Vendors measured and highlighted in KLAS Reports. 27,839 Downloads of KLAS specialty reports published last year by healthcare customers. Average of 400-500 healthcare customer downloads per report. 15,000 Clinical End Users to date through 2017 participating in usability studies Research focus is on the customer experience. Vendors receive guidance. KLAS insights assist organizations. © Copyright KLAS 2016

United Kingdom Saudi Arabia United Kingdom Australia CIO United Kingdom Brazil Germany Australia Richard Corbridge

INTEROPERABILITY IN THE U.S. © Copyright KLAS 2016

Interoperability – Why does it matter? © Copyright KLAS 2016

Engaging Stakeholders “No Progress without Measurement” Engaging Stakeholders © Copyright KLAS 2016

What is Interoperability? © Copyright KLAS 2016

US Interoperability Round 4 What we are learning from round 3 to 4 of Interoperability research in the US 30% 2016 2017 25% athenahealth GE Healthcare 20% Greenway Allscripts Provider Interop Success Rate 15% NextGen Healthcare Epic Greenway athenahealth MEDITECH 10% Epic Cerner GE Healthcare Allscripts 05% McKesson Cerner eClinicalWorks MEDITECH eClinicalWorks NextGen Healthcare McKesson 00% 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Satisfaction with Interoperability Support for Different EMR © Copyright KLAS 2017

US Interoperability Round 4 What we are learning from round 3 to 4 of Interoperability research in the US 100% Provider Interop Success Rate Satisfaction with Interoperability Support for Different EMR © Copyright KLAS 2017

The Details are in the Data © Copyright KLAS 2016

UK INTEROPERABILITY © Copyright KLAS 2016

UK Interoperability Round 1- (Very Early Data) Who are the early participants? ROLES CARE SETTINGS REPRESENTED EARLY DATA Actively Sharing Clinical Data? © Copyright KLAS 2017

UK Interoperability Round 1- (Very Early Data) Supplier Strengths/Weaknesses: Rate your supplier in the following areas: (Rating: 1= Extremely Weak, 9= Extremely Strong) EARLY DATA © Copyright KLAS 2017

UK Interoperability Round 1- (Very Early Data) © Copyright KLAS 2017

Major Barriers to Interoperability- (Very Early Data) What are the industry gaps? “Technical skills within the NHS are hard to come by” “Clear and consistent messaging for suppliers” “Lack of a clear path when it comes to social care.” “Funds and resources to pursue interoperability” “Clinician buy-in to sharing & resolving liability concerns” EARLY DATA What are the supplier barriers? “Some EPR solutions are not mature enough” “Vendor costs are prohibitive” “Suppliers do put barriers up – wasting resources” “Technically challenging to link systems” © Copyright KLAS 2017

JOIN THE EFFORT © Copyright KLAS 2016