Challenging Decisions–Best Of Breed Or Monolithic Systems

Challenging Decisions-Best of Breed or Monolithic Systems

The need for speed and flexibility of software change is increasing, and the ability to provide quality care in the healthcare industry at a rapid space is forever evolving. A monolithic system is a closed-loop system, meaning that its software addresses all areas of the organization under one system with limited ability to integrate other products (Byers, 2011). Nevertheless, this system includes a one-stop-shop for support. Impressively, a monolithic system is used by a variety of health care professionals; scheduling, billing, EMR portion of the system, used by everyone. However, integrated systems share a common database that incorporates the electronic medical record and practice management (Byers, 2011). However, one of the drawbacks of using one vendor is not a guarantee that a common database will exist, many EMR companies incorporate an application under the same name. In turn, the vendor develops an interface to connect the two separate databases, only to market them as an integrated system (Kleaveland).

The Best of Breed approach allows for personalized customization based on the software’s intrinsic qualities (Kleaveland, 2007). This approach allows for more flexibility to integrate with various vendors. Nonetheless, I consider it a great comprehensive solution for the health care organization. Developing an interface that incorporates the different vendors and the need to exchange data is essential with this system; the registration interface is the most common solution (Byers, 2011).

Private payers, the bottom line is concerned with cost. The integrated system deals with one vendor for support and technical difficulties. Management of the technical aspects of the building and maintenance of the interface is part of a bundle, plus the benefits of the systems’ shared applications, therefore, reducing costs (Kleaveland, 2007). The best feature, which is the most beneficial in terms of value is the ability to replace the superbill with the electronic encounter form. The healthcare completes this form during the patient encounter, and then it is sent electronically to expedite the payment process. This is difficult and expensive if working with two separate systems. On the other hand, the utilization of an established system allows the selecting software to incorporate with the existing software that is already in place. Furthermore, decreasing costs and minimizing disruptions to an organization while implementation takes place (Kleaveland, 2007).

References:

Byers, J. (2011). EMRs & Clinical Integration: Best of Breed or one Vendor? Retrieved from: https://www.aiin.healthcare/topics/ehr-emr/emrs-clinical-integration-best-breed-or-one-vendor

Kleaveland, B. (2007). The Tech Doctor: Best-of-Breed or Integrated Systems? Retrieved from: https://www.physicianspractice.com/tech-doctor-best-breed-or-integrated-systems

Byers, J. (2011). EMRs & Clinical Integration: Best of Breed or one Vendor? Retrieved from: https://www.aiin.healthcare/topics/ehr-emr/emrs-clinical-integration-best-breed-or-one-vendor

Kleaveland, B. (2007). The Tech Doctor: Best-of-Breed or Integrated Systems? Retrieved from: https://www.physicianspractice.com/tech-doctor-best-breed-or-integrated-systems