为什么 AI 正在对医疗软件开销进行压力测试
Why AI Is Compression-Testing Healthcare Software Overhead
CharmHealth 战略副总裁 Venky Chellappa 25亿美元。这就是Forrester 预测美国医疗服务提供者今年将在软件上支出的金额。这相当于其整体IT预算的约36%。
但医疗服务提供者衡量成本的方式可能存在缺陷。如果他们是基于一种已经不再合理的企业软件模式来支出这笔巨额资金,会怎样?
医疗服务提供者承担了大量与各项任务相关的费用,例如新员工入职、员工再培训、管理工作流碎片化、账单管理开销,以及维持医疗机构正常运营所需的行政流程。这些成本远远超出典型解决方案的标价所能体现的水平。
医疗机构接受了这样一种说法:企业软件很昂贵,而且还会继续变得更加昂贵。文化让我们认为,这只是经营的一部分,是一种必要之恶。然而,我们可能第一次看到这种说法受到挑战。
AI
有潜力以真正有意义的方式解决医疗领域的运营低效问题。
在多年观察软件如何被采购、销售和部署之后,我看到,计算方式即将发生变化。
小型医疗机构,大的影响
以一家拥有5名医疗服务提供者的医疗办公室为例。这类医疗机构往往维持精简的员工队伍,这意味着事先授权队列可能会积压,或者一名员工可能需要一段时间才能完成全面入职。被拒赔的索赔可能需要一名账单专员花费多达两天时间重新处理。所有这些看似微小的事情加在一起,会形成巨大的影响。
现在想想,如果每天为每名员工节省一小时,这意味着什么。在一支由8至10人组成的团队中,这很快就相当于重新获得一名全职员工的工作时间。这并不是要解雇员工,而是以一种对很可能处于微薄利润率运营的医疗机构而言负担得起的方式,节省时间和管理开销;它能够释放现有资源,更好地服务患者和医疗机构。
同样的逻辑也适用于被拒赔的索赔。独立医疗机构的平均拒赔率约占已提交索赔的5%至10%,其中许多拒赔本可以通过弥补文档缺口、消除编码不一致或事先授权问题来避免。如果一家医疗机构拥有能够应用 AI 自动发现并修正细节问题的软件,就可以保护那些否则可能需要数周才能追回的收入。
在工作流的每一个阶段,都有一些例子表明,适当引入 AI 将改善医疗机构的整体健康状况。将 AI 注入造成最大阻力的流程,可以帮助医疗机构真正进行结构性改变,改变其设施的运营方式。
重新思考采购流程
设想 AI 能够在医疗机构内完成的所有事情,可能会令人非常兴奋;反过来,这可能会导致一些医疗机构根据功能承诺来评估软件采购决策。然而,这将是一个错误。各组织围绕功能检查清单和集成要求建立了冗长的评估流程。尽管这些考量仍然相关,但可能还不够。
更重要的评估框架,应当聚焦于降低复杂性。
能够消除工作流步骤的平台,比那些增加一两个酷炫功能的平台创造更大的价值。这是因为,专注于简化运营的技术会在更深层次上影响医疗机构,触及收入周期绩效、人员配置效率、患者和医疗服务提供者的满意度等方面。
医疗组织正处于这样一种环境中:劳动力短缺的同时,人工成本不断上升。更聪明地利用资源势在必行,因为大多数医疗机构无法通过招聘来解决问题。而更聪明地利用资源的一部分,就是改变对软件供应商的预期。
从历史上看,healthtech 的定价模式通过实施服务、咨询、持续培训项目和基于用户的许可不断扩展。但随着 AI 让技术变得更易于实施、学习和管理,这些附加服务已不再必要。
此外,AI 正在压缩软件生产本身的成本。解决方案的开发速度比以往更快,成本也比以往更低。因此,医疗机构不应再被迫支付不断上涨的溢价。而且,凭借 AI 快速成功帮助新用户完成入职的能力,如果对软件供应商不满意,医疗机构将不会再害怕更换供应商。门槛已经低得多。
我们应该提出的问题
我们不能再像过去那样采购软件,评估和采购标准需要发展。我们应该提出这样的问题:该解决方案是否降低了复杂性?它是否减少了运营低效并简化了入职流程?如果是,具体如何做到?
AI 是否实质性地减少了工程开销?如果确实如此,为什么我的成本还要上涨?(不应该上涨。)归根结底,对话会从“这款软件能做什么?”转向“这款软件消除了什么?”这将形成一个围绕不同类型供应商对话建立的采购框架。
企业软件用了二十年变得更加昂贵和复杂。医疗软件也随之发展,但随后又叠加了复杂的监管和账单环境。由于缺乏更好的替代方案,医疗服务提供者只能接受这种状况。
得益于 AI,更好的替代方案已经出现。医疗机构和供应商都应注意到这一点。
关于 Venky Chellappa 博士Venky Chellappa是CharmHealth的战略副总裁。CharmHealth 是一家为医疗服务提供者提供医疗技术解决方案的领导者。在这一职位上,他带领CharmHealth从一家初创企业发展成为领先的 EHR 供应商之一,为门诊和医疗行业提供完全集成的解决方案。此外,Venky 还是 CharmHealth+Bioverge Digital Health Transformation Fund 的管理合伙人之一。他的目标是与 CharmHealth 一起,将创新理念带到医疗服务点。
Venky Chellappa, VP of Strategy, CharmHealth
$25 billion. That’s how much Forrester predicts U.S. healthcare providers will spend on software this year. That equates to approximately 36% of their overall IT budget.
But the way providers are sizing up costs could be flawed. What if they are spending these substantial sums based on an enterprise software model that no longer makes sense?
Providers absorb a lot of expenses associated with tasks like onboarding new employees, retraining staff, managing workflow fragmentation, billing overhead, and maintaining the administrative processes required to keep practices running. These costs far exceed what a typical solution’s price tag would lead you to believe.
Practices buy into the narrative that enterprise software is expensive and will continue to grow more expensive. It’s just part of doing business, a necessary evil culture tells us. Yet, for the first time, we may see this narrative challenged.
AI
has the potential to address healthcare’s operational inefficiencies in a truly meaningful way.
After spending years observing how software is bought, sold and deployed, I see that the math is about to change.
Small Practices, Big Impact
Take a medical office with five providers. These practices tend to maintain a lean staff, which means the prior authorization queue can back up, or it can take time to get an employee fully onboarded. Denied claims might take a billing specialist as much as two days to rework. All of the seemingly little things add up to become something big.
Now think about what saving an hour a day per employee could mean. Across a team of 8-10 people, that quickly translates to recovering the equivalent of a full-time employee. This is not about letting staff go but rather saving time and overhead in a way that is fiscally responsible for a practice likely operating on thin margins; it frees existing resources to better serve patients and the practice.
The same logic applies to denied claims. The average denial rate across independent practices runs between 5-10% of submitted claims, and many of those denials are preventable by closing documentation gaps and eliminating coding inconsistencies or problems with preauthorizations. If a practice has software that applies AI to catch and fix small details automatically, it can protect revenue that might take weeks to recover otherwise.
There are examples across every stage of the workflow where a dose of AI would improve a practice’s overall health. Injecting AI into the processes that cause the most drag enables them to make real, structural changes in how their facilities operate.
Reconsidering the Purchase Process
It can be very exciting to imagine all of the things AI could accomplish within a practice, which in turn, could lead some practices to evaluate software purchasing decisions based on promises of capabilities. This would be a mistake, however. Organizations have built lengthy evaluation processes around functionality checklists and integration requirements. While those considerations remain relevant, they may not be sufficient.
A more important framework for evaluation is one that focuses on reducing complexity.
Platforms that eliminate workflow steps create more value than those that add a cool feature or two. This is because technology focused on simplifying operations impacts a practice at a deeper level, touching revenue cycle performance, staffing efficiency, patient and provider satisfaction, and more.
Healthcare organizations are running in an environment where labor costs are rising amid a workforce shortage. Getting smarter with resources is imperative because most practices won’t be able to hire their way out. And part of getting smarter is changing what is expected of software vendors.
Historically, healthtech pricing models expanded through implementation services, consulting, ongoing training programs, and user-based licensing. But as technology becomes easier to implement, learn and manage with AI, these add-ons are no longer necessary.
Additionally, AI is compressing the cost of software production itself. Solutions are being developed faster and cheaper than ever before. As such, practices should no longer be forced to pay an ever-increasing premium. And with AI’s ability to successfully onboard new users quickly, practices won’t be afraid to switch to another software provider if they aren’t satisfied. The barrier is far lower.
Questions We Should Be Asking
Instead of buying software the way we always have, evaluation and purchase criteria need to evolve. We should be asking questions like: Does the solution reduce complexity? Does it decrease operational inefficiencies and simplify onboarding? If so, how?
Does AI materially reduce engineering overhead? If it does, why should my costs go up? (They shouldn’t.) Ultimately, the conversation moves from “What does this software do?” to “What does this software eliminate?” This creates a buying framework built around different types of vendor conversations.
Enterprise software spent two decades getting more expensive and complex. Healthcare software followed suit but then layered a sophisticated regulatory and billing environment on top. Providers absorbed it for lack of a better alternative.
The better alternative is here, thanks to AI. Both practices and vendors should take note.
About Venky Chellappa, Ph.D.
Venky Chellappa
is vice president of strategy at CharmHealth, a leader in healthcare technology solutions for providers. In this capacity, he has grown CharmHealth from a startup venture to one of the leading EHR vendors, offering fully integrated solutions to the ambulatory and healthcare industries. In addition, Venky serves as one of the managing partners of the CharmHealth+Bioverge Digital Health Transformation Fund. His goal is to bring innovative ideas to the point of care along with CharmHealth.
Reader Interactions