Whether in a leading or supporting role, third-party firms specializing in a vendor's applications implement them more adeptly than the vendor itself for all but one vendor - often by a wide margin, according to a new KLAS study.

For the report, Clinical Implementation Services: High in Demand But More Specialized in Need, healthcare providers reported contracting out implementation work to 30 different companies, from smaller boutique firms to the software vendors themselves. Every vendor, except for Epic, was outstripped by third-parties specializing in the vendors' own applications.

[See also: Consultants have never been in greater demand,]

"Both Coastal and Peer Consulting outscored GE in overall satisfaction by 30 or more points of 100. ACS and Vitalize overtook Allscripts by 20-plus points, and Encore and Vitalize outscored Cerner by the same margin," said Mike Smith, KLAS services research general manager and author of the report. "Epic's scores were industry leading. The remaining vendors, on the other hand, earned the lowest ratings in their categories when acting in either a principal or supportive capacity."

Providers should understand that, even though consultants outperform the vendors, they will need to work with the vendor for at least part of the build because there are aspects that consultants generally don't take over, Smith noted.

While principal roles were previously common for many of these vendors/firms, KLAS has identified a new trend emerging over the last couple of years.

"The current environment has produced an increasing number of overall projects, but fewer projects in which firms take the lead in large-scale implementations," Smith explained. "More community hospitals are reaching out for guidance as they implement their newly acquired EMRs. Larger hospitals are often calling for clinical documentation and CPOE assistance. These projects are opening many doors for professional service firms to assist in a supportive role."

Most firms now typically specialize in work for only one or two software vendors because of the growing need for vendor specific know-how –  a strategy that appears to be paying off. In this study, every vendor but Epic was out-performed by third parties specializing in the vendors' own applications.

[See also: KLAS names top 20 software and service vendors.]

Clinical Implementation Services: High in Demand But More Specialized in Need categorizes vendors/firms by role filled for providers – either principal or supportive. In the first category, Deloitte earned the highest score among third-party firms, at 88.8 out of 100 points, while Epic took first among vendor-only implementations, at 92.3. In a supportive capacity, IHS was the highest rated third-party firm (96.5) and Siemens the top vendor (78.7). The report also rates 13 other firms/vendors, including ACS, Accenture, Allscripts, Cerner, CTGHS, Dell Services, Encore, GE, maxIT, McKesson, NHA, Siemens, and Vitalize.