Speaker 1: My name is Suzanne Stevenson. I'm the Chief Information Officer for CUNE Health System. I was brought in by our CEO today to discuss how the possibility of switching into a new electronic health record system in our CUNE Health System. Currently, our EHR system is Athena Health. Our system is already nine years old. It is more suitable for small to medium-sized clinics or medical practices. However, with the expansion of the facilities of our health system network, with adding an urgent care and behavioral health clinic as an organization, I think we need a better EHR system that actually improves the workflow. I've listed all the other reasons why I think Athena Health should be replaced. It has high costs for running the billing system, and I'm getting complaints that the billing software system constantly has glitches with very minimal tech support from the vendor, from the company itself. Also, on top of that, there's a lot of security concerns because of the overwhelming authorization requirements. Therefore, this gives a lack of efficiency in the actual workflow, which leads to weak profitability. Given the trends of our current market within the healthcare industry of the U.S., I've come down to two different candidates of EHR systems that we could use. For me personally, the two EHR systems that come to mind immediately are Cerner and Epic. I worked with the Cerner system for only a few months in my previous career as a lab technologist in a hospital laboratory about 12 years ago. Therefore, for the detailed features and benefits I am not too familiar with. However, my understanding is that it is very easy to navigate and user-friendly for facility, you know, such facility that we have with our four ambulatory clinics and the behavioral health clinic as well as the urgent care. I'm also pretty familiar with the Epic system because I worked with it at least five years in my previous position. Let's talk about the Cerner system a little bit here and what it is. It's a cloud-based EHR software used by healthcare organizations to streamline their operations to provide quality healthcare through documentation, revenue management, and health analytics. Cerner's key features include auto text and voice recognition for efficient charting and documentation, a user-friendly dashboard which streamlines workflow, mobile apps for easy access of records, patient portals, and health analytics. Now, sharing data is foundational to Cerner's patient-centric interoperability. It is focused on strengthening patient experiences and clinical workflows. Their innovative open platform strengthens scope and services across the continuum. And their open business approach for interoperable technologies help organizations advance patient care by securely exchanging and accessing information across the healthcare ecosystem. Now, let's talk about the Epic system. Epic is also a cloud-based EHR system used by mainly large and medium healthcare organizations to access, organize, store, and share electronic medical records. It has become an EHR technology leader with healthcare organizations in that they built this big integrated platform for most areas of patient healthcare. These are modules built on the same platform and data structure as all of their other products. So, some of the examples of these modules are ASAP ER built for ER visits, Epic Beaker for laboratory systems, and Epic Care Ambulatory for ambulatory or specialty clinics. Epic's key feature includes Care Everywhere that has interoperability with other EHRs, easy online scheduling, and the MyChart patient portal that allows patients to be engaged and involved in their care. So, patients can check and communicate with their doctors and their clinical providers directly, check their lab results, schedule an appointment, and so on and so forth, through MyChart, that is. So, let's revisit, let's take a look at pros, cons, and benefits of each of the two systems that we are discussing currently, that we're looking at. With the Cerner system, some of the pros are it's got high data security, it's also user-friendly, and it's collaborative across multiple facilities and departments. This is obviously the last feature. It's important. We have a total of the six different facilities between our four medical clinics and our urgent care and behavioral health clinics. It is important to be able to talk about the platform to actually be able to access each other's records and data of all the patients. Now, what are the cons? When you're actually going through the system, it's a little bit time-consuming moving between pages. And truthfully, probably in the technological perspective, it is a little bit behind in technology. Also, what's very notable from other Cerner system clients is that there's delay in customer support. And looking at the implementation time, which is, this is of course an estimated number, it takes about 10 to 18 weeks. And cost is also estimated. Obviously, for the detailed cost, we can have the company or the procurement office contact them for the detailed per-software and per-implementation cost per department. But this is what we're looking at. Now, let's take a look at the EPIC system. Pros and cons. Pros. EPIC is very widely used in a lot of the big hospital network and health system because it is probably the most interoperable with other EHRs that are in the market. As far as managing different clinics and practices, they have a very robust practice management solutions, integration in between platforms. Also, it's got a very updated technology. This is obviously shared by current EPIC customers in different health systems. Now, what are the cons? The big, big, big con. Very pricey. Implementation costs are very high. And then also, one interesting thing that many people said that it's set up with episodes. Therefore, if there is an erroneous episode or visit of a patient, it's kind of difficult to actually delete. So this obviously would affect the quality of the patient actual visit to the practice. Time to implement. It takes anywhere from two to six months, depending how large the facility is. And cost. Again, let's go back to the cost. Very pricey. With, ouch, the initial implementation cost of $500,000, just with this client-based system, plus all the monthly costs of $25,000, which includes training and setup. All right. At this point, let's look at what we have. What we are, who we are, and how do we see the new EHR system? How does it fit? Which one do you think fits best, just by looking at this? This is our current stats. CUNE Health System. We serve 15,000 to 20,000 patients within our community, with originally four ambulatory clinic facilities that has now expanded to an urgent care facility and one behavioral health clinic. Okay? We have a current EHR system, which is Athena Health, that is nine years old. It's great. However, dashboard and platform is not as updated and as not user-friendly. Also, the interoperability with different systems is very low, which makes it a little bit more challenging and difficult when we have new patients with transferring records and so on and whatnot. Since nobody has paper records anymore, everything is now digitized. So, this is something that we can take a look at. Now, very important, our budget for this new system is roughly 200,000 for the first year. Looking at the data and what we've been presented, as far as implementation, steps and tools, and most importantly, cost, as well as our clinical settings and the settings and the size of our health system network. We're considerably small. We're not a big hospital network. We don't have any hospitals. I can say that I think Cerner EHR system would be the best choice for CUNE. Their Millennium Ambulatory EHR system is very good, very well-designed for ambulatory practice facilities, such as the four clinics that we have. Also, it provides EHR solutions to a wide variety of medical practices. And this program ensures compliance with the HIPAA regulations while reducing errors and enhancing efficiency. Key features, which is important, include a user friendly dashboard that streamlines workflow. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. We like that, right? Streamlining workflow. It provides secure access to records via mobile devices. Again, patient can access this from their own mobile device. And a convenient trust search function. Enjoy the video that outlines what the capability of the Cerner system. And that is the end of our presentation today. I think I can convince everyone that Cerner is a better choice out of the two because of number one, cost. And it fits with the budget. It fits with how our clinics are designed and urgent care centers are designed with an updated technology as well that can improve and optimize our workflow. Thank you.