TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Cerner HealtheIntent vs. SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cerner HealtheIntent

    Score3.5 out of 10
    N/ACerner offers their population health management software platform, HealtheIntent, their cloud-based data reconciliation and population stratification platform to provide a comprehensive population health management solution.N/A

    SSIS

    Score8 out of 10
    N/AMicrosoft's SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) is a data integration solution.N/A
    Pricing
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Considered Both Products
    Oracle
    No answer on this topic
    Microsoft
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    84%
    Would buy again
    21 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    96%
    Delivers good value for the price
    24 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    88%
    Happy with the feature set
    22 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    10 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    95%
    Implementation went as expected
    19 Answers
    Features
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Data Source Connection
    Comparison of Data Source Connection features of Cerner HealtheIntent and SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    Feature
    Cerner HealtheIntent
    -
    Ratings
    SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    7.0
    56 Ratings
    18% below category average
    Connect to traditional data sources00 Ratings9.056 Ratings
    Connecto to Big Data and NoSQL00 Ratings5.043 Ratings
    Data Transformations
    Comparison of Data Transformations features of Cerner HealtheIntent and SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    Feature
    Cerner HealtheIntent
    -
    Ratings
    SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    6.8
    56 Ratings
    18% below category average
    Simple transformations00 Ratings8.956 Ratings
    Complex transformations00 Ratings4.755 Ratings
    Data Modeling
    Comparison of Data Modeling features of Cerner HealtheIntent and SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    Feature
    Cerner HealtheIntent
    -
    Ratings
    SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    7.5
    54 Ratings
    6% below category average
    Data model creation00 Ratings9.028 Ratings
    Metadata management00 Ratings6.035 Ratings
    Business rules and workflow00 Ratings7.145 Ratings
    Collaboration00 Ratings9.140 Ratings
    Testing and debugging00 Ratings6.451 Ratings
    Data Governance
    Comparison of Data Governance features of Cerner HealtheIntent and SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    Feature
    Cerner HealtheIntent
    -
    Ratings
    SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)
    5.4
    43 Ratings
    40% below category average
    Integration with data quality tools00 Ratings6.238 Ratings
    Integration with MDM tools00 Ratings4.638 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    Skyvia
    Score10 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    IBM InfoSphere Information Server
    Score10 out of 10
    Enterprises
    No answers on this topic
    SolarWinds Task Factory
    Score8.3 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Likelihood to Recommend
    6.0
    (2 ratings)
    8.0
    (56 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (4 ratings)
    Usability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (11 ratings)
    Performance
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.8
    (6 ratings)
    Support Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (8 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (2 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Cerner HealtheIntentSSIS
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Oracle
    My honest opinion is if an organization is fully running a Cerner EMR, it is almost not avoidable choice to use HealtheIntent. From performance and consistency views, it performs very well simply because HealtheIntent and Cerner EMR are from the same place. From the cost perspective, it's up to the contract. But in a general sense, it is more cost effective rather than running a separate analytics framework. If an organization is running a mix of Cerner and other clinical IT system, the answer is all but case by case.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    As I mentioned earlier SQL Server Integration Services is suitable if you want to manage data from different applications. It really helps in fetching the data and generating reports. Its automation make it very easy and time efficient. It works well with large database as well. But it doesn't work well with real time data, it will take some time to gather the real time data. I would not recommend using it in a real time/fast-paced environment.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Oracle
    • Reliability means Cerner HealtheIntent hardly ever goes down
    • Cerner HealtheIntent can be customized for our business needs
    • We have our own Cerner HealtheIntent server instead of using the cloud
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • Standard ETL use cases for daily loads
    • Loading incoming data from Vendors which is placed on FTP and adding them to the SQL Warehouse
    • Creating outgoing data files and writing them to Vendor FTPs
    • Easy Active Directory integration for seamless connections to SQL Server
    • CI/CD by hosting the code on visualstudio.com
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Oracle
    • Metadata management in HealtheIntent should be improved. For example, we could find similar looking data sources (for example, diagnosis tables with similar names) but it was hard to distinguish and know which one is the one in production. It was because several data stewards loaded the same table with a different purpose (with similar tables names). And HealtheIntent doesn't have a metadata "for a test" or "for development", which makes hard to manage versions of one data source.
    • To run a SQL in HealtheIntent, there is a time limit of only 10 minutes. Also, there is no delicate configuration of query execution. It may not need a lot of functions like Toad or SQL developer, but what HealtheIntent provides is very limited.
    • Similar to the one above, HealtheIntent may need better metadata management for users. It is hard to find a table that I need, even to find out the existence of the table. Basic statistics like the size of a table, # of rows may be helpful for users.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • Connection managers for online data sources can be tricky to configure.
    • Performance tuning is an art form and trialing different data flow task options can be cumbersome. SSIS can do a better job of providing performance data including historical for monitoring.
    • Mapping destination using OLE DB command is difficult as destination columns are unnamed.
    • Excel or flat file connections are limited by version and type.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    Some features should be revised or improved, some tools (using it with Visual Studio) of the toolbox should be less schematic and somewhat more flexible. Using for example, the CSV data import is still very old-fashioned and if the data format changes it requires a bit of manual labor to accept the new data structure
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    SSIS is a great tool for most ETL needs. It has the 90% (or more) use cases covered and even in many of the use cases where it is not ideal SSIS can be extended via a .NET language to do the job well in a supportable way for almost any performance workload.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Performance
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    SQL Server Integration Services performance is dependent directly upon the resources provided to the system. In our environment, we allocated 6 nodes of 4 CPUs, 64GB each, running in parallel. Unfortunately, we had to ramp-up to such a robust environment to get the performance to where we needed it. Most of the reports are completed in a reasonable timeframe. However, in the case of slow running reports, it is often difficult if not impossible to cancel the report without killing the report instance or stopping the service.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    The support, when necessary, is excellent. But beyond that, it is very rarely necessary because the user community is so large, vibrant and knowledgable, a simple Google query or forum question can answer almost everything you want to know. You can also get prewritten script tasks with a variety of functionality that saves a lot of time.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    Oracle
    No answers on this topic
    Microsoft
    The implementation may be different in each case, it is important to properly analyze all the existing infrastructure to understand the kind of work needed, the type of software used and the compatibility between these, the features that you want to exploit, to understand what is possible and which ones require integration with third-party tools
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Oracle
    We have had Cerner HealtheIntent for over 10 years and it has been a strong EMR. Other EMRs have been OK. They have just done the job, but haven't lived up to their promise. When a patch is put out for Cerner HealtheIntent, it actually works without bugs. Reaching support for Cerner HealtheIntent is easier and our issues are taken care of in a timely manner.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    I think SQL Server Integration Services is better suited for on-premises data movement and ADF is more suited for the cloud. Though ADF has more connectors, SQL Server Integration Services is more robust and has better functionality just because it has been around much longer
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Oracle
    • ROI may be depending on the contract. But even if an organization is spending the same money for either homegrown analytics or HealtheIntent, HealtheIntent provides more agility of project or cost spending. If you don't like it you can discontinue anytime.
    • The negative one is, HealtheIntent is a new product in Cerner and at this point, it may not be capable of everything like homegrown analytics. The question would be the future of HealtheIntent and will be able to cover what you need soon.
    • If an organization is pursuing a standard, generic analytics and reporting (such as the combination of Oracle and Tableau), HealtheIntent is great. If not (for example, running R and d3.js for specific cases), the cost of migration to HealtheIntent will skyrocket.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • Without this, we would have to manually update a spreadsheet of our SQL Server inventory
    • We would also have poor alerting; if an instance was down we wouldn't know until it was reported by a user
    • We only have one other person who uses SQL Server Integration Services , he's the expert. It would fall to me without him and I would not enjoy being responsible for it.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots