Name: Cerner HealtheIntent
Rating: 4.5 (8 reviews)
Author: Oracle

If you want reliably, Cerner HealtheIntent is a good choice

Rating: 6 out of 10

Incentivized

March 18, 2021

Drew Spangler

Company Owner

Orlando Homeopathic Body Works (Medical Devices, 1-10 employees)

Vetted Review

Verified User

7 years of experience

View profile

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

Cerner HealtheIntent is being used by AdventHealth for an EMR for the past 10 years but over time has had very few updates done on the front-end user interface to make it more user friendly. Being more user friendly would make Cerner HealtheIntent easier to use for our end users. Cerner HealtheIntent has its plusses and minuses, but was far more reliable than the other EMR that was supposed to replace it.

Pros

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

Cons

Cerner HealtheIntent needs to be more end-user friendly
Cerner HealtheIntent needs to have a cloud-based option

Likelihood to Recommend

Cerner HealtheIntent has been very reliable, as it hardly ever goes down. So it can be counted on. The end-user interface takes some time to get used to and could be better. Modules aren't always easy to find, making doing a certain task a bit cumbersome or taking more time to perform a task.

Return on Investment

Cerner HealtheIntent has paid for itself many times over
The cost for renewal for Cerner HealtheIntent every year isn't cheap

Alternatives Considered

athenaClinicals and Epic EpicCare EMR

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.

Other Software Used

athenaClinicals, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Nuance Dragon Speech Recognition

HealtheIntent is new but it will be big portion of the Cerner solution

Rating: 9 out of 10

Incentivized

April 30, 2018

Verified User

Project Manager in Research & Development

Hospital & Health Care Company, 10,001+ employees

Vetted Review

Verified User

1 year of experience

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

My employer is a non-profit organization of healthcare system running many hospitals and clinics. We have implemented Cerner recently and HealtheIntent as part of the components we adopted. Before then, we had run our own analytics platform that consists of Oracle-based transactional database and Enterprise Data Warehouse, Tableau and Cognos based reporting environment. In the transition of implementing Cerner EMR we have used our own analytics to populate clinical data for secondary use, it had a lot of issues of data consistency and cost. HealtheIntent is a new option by Cerner that enables an integrated data analytics and reporting environment, with a reasonable cost of ownership and management.

Pros

First of all and not arguably, it is well integrated with Cerner EMR. All the data elements in the Millennium database that are the core of Cerner EMR database are straightforwardly imported into HealtheIntent. In addition, if you have already been running Table based reports but need to migrate to HealtheIntent, it is very straightforward.
HealtheIntent runs upon a web-based toolkit. It is easy to access the data, reports, and configuration. There are not very much details in the web tools but it has a minimum of functions sets that are needed for managing clinical data for the purpose of analysis and reporting.
Support from Cerner is good to understand this new platform and utilize it in a practical manner. There is an online community (uCern) that has active discussions around HealtheIntent, the user can find answers quite fast and easily from there.

Cons

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.

Likelihood to Recommend

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.

Return on Investment

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.

Alternatives Considered

Oracle Data Warehouse and Tableau Server

Our organization had run Cerner EMR already so we only had a selection of adding HealtheIntent or not. There was no competitor. There are two aspects behind our decision: one is cost and the other is performance. We could save 50 full-time employee's expense to run our legacy analytics framework. I have no idea of details of the contract to buy and maintain HealtheIntent but generally speaking, it is saving money. Second, performances in terms of populating, processing data in HealtheIntent is way better than that of the legacy system.

Other Software Used

Tableau Server, Oracle Data Warehouse

Operating Systems	Unspecified
Mobile Application	No

Epic

InterSystems HealthShare

eClinicalWorks

Meditech Electronic Health Records

Definitive Healthcare

InterSystems TrakCare

OnBase

athenahealth Population Health

3M 360 Encompass System

3M Healthcare Transformation Suite

Epic Healthy Planet

Altera Care Director

Altera dbMotion

Meditech Expanse Population Health

Zywave Analytics Cloud - Decision Master Warehouse

Cons

Cons