KLAS Shares User Reviews of Computer-Assisted Coding Vendors

May 19, 2023 - Healthcare organizations value client support, coder productivity, and accuracy when selecting computer-assisted coding (CAC) vendors, a KLAS report found. The Computer-Assisted Coding 2023 report sheds light on how different CAC vendors fare across healthcare organizations.

Dolbey

Dolbey’s Fusion CAC solution received an overall performance score of 89.9 on a 100-point scale. Users were generally satisfied with customer support, noting that they received timely responses and found the team easy to work with. However, some said problem resolution can take longer than hoped, and a few users said they would like more transparency about where Dolbey is taking the product.

Dolbey customers were also satisfied with the vendor’s coding productivity, citing its integration that positively influences coder efficiency. Organizations reported that Dolbey has made workflows simpler and more streamlined, but some users wanted more development in automated coding and reporting.

The vendor’s coding solution was rated highest for coding accuracy and its ability to perform well across departments. In addition, the vendor received the highest score for money’s worth, with respondents saying the solution saves their staff time and reduces organizational costs.

Optum

Optum received an overall performance score of 82.3. Customer experience feedback is mixed. Most respondents indicated positive resolutions to problems during escalation and said they receive quick responses. However, some users reported difficulties escalating issues and were concerned with a lack of timely resolution and clear communication.

Consistent training drives coding productivity for Optum users, but respondents said the vendor’s complexity and occasional downtime can sometimes hurt productivity. Users also noted that the CAC solution is more effective when used with Optum’s CDI solution.

Optum users said the solution is less expensive than other systems. But customers were also the least likely to buy the system again due to technical issues, including downtime and functionality limitations. Customers also said the vendor charges additionally for upgrades, enhancements, and other technologies.

3M

3M’s 360 Encompass System scored 81.7 for overall performance. Like Optum users, 3M customers reported mixed feedback on the solution. Respondents said the vendor’s customer support has helped improve integration, staff productivity, and implementations. But they also shared that issues often need to be escalated and problem resolution can take a while due to support personnel with insufficient knowledge.

Coding productivity was generally well-rated, with users citing the solution’s ease of use and reporting and analytics capabilities that increase productivity and understanding. However, the solution requires some manual work from users and organizations have cited issues with reporting and templates that require human resources.

Satisfaction with coding accuracy was high among organizations, with customers most satisfied with the inpatient coding but most likely to struggle with outpatient, ProFee, and radiology coding. Organizations were also likely to stay with 3M as a vendor, although a few users felt they were not getting the support they should for how much they pay.

AGS Health

AGS Health’s CAC solution received an overall performance score of 96, but the vendor had a smaller customer base included in the report compared to the others. Respondents said the vendor offers quick responses and problem resolution, but some users noted an opportunity for better training materials.

Customers were satisfied with the vendor, saying the solution simplifies their coding processes and improves in effectiveness as coders work with the platform. AGS Health users saw value in the solution and said they would repurchase the product and keep it in their long-term plans.