Why? All three companies have a history of and reputation for innovation, yes, something of which the healthcare industry is perpetual need. But I think their healthcare dominance will hinge more on Apple, Epic and IBM being seen not necessarily as the most innovative but rather as the safe choice.
An adage has been floating around the business world for years that nobody gets fired for choosing IBM products. I have spoken to several CIOs who say there’s a similar saying in the industry about Epic. The software is expensive, but it meets business needs. And as more organizations pick Epic, data exchange needs means other organizations face increasing pressure to pick Epic too. And now, the HealthKit-Epic integration may add additional pressure on providers looking to both connect with consumers and offer more coordinated care.
As for Apple, more than two-thirds of physicians already have iPhones in their pockets, and the iPad is the dominant tablet device among clinicians. Choosing iOS enterprise apps would most likely be the path of least resistance for a hospital or health system.
Mr. Pelino says the IBM-Apple partnership “catches us doing good,” as Apple’s products continue to dominate the mobile device space and IBM continues to grow its market share in the business IT world. But what it does more than anything is catch both companies’ products working.
And that’s what healthcare organizations want — solutions that work, and work with what they already have. A recent report from KLAS reveals more than 80 percent of Epic (and Cerner) customers considering acquiring an interactive patient system will choose their respective vendor’s product over a best-of-breed solution. This finding reflects a larger trend — faced with mounting challenges and financial pressures, hospitals and health systems will pick what they know will work.
Which is why it’s hard to see the rising triumvirate of Epic, Apple and IBM as anything but unstoppable.
