Lab professionals will learn more at the upcoming 30th annual edition of the event
Big changes and challenges are coming for the clinical laboratory anatomic pathology industry, and with them a slew of opportunities for lab and pathology practice leaders. At the upcoming 30th Annual Executive War College on Diagnostics, Pathology, and Clinical Laboratory Management, expert speakers and panelists will focus on the three most disruptive forces.
There will be more than 169 presenters at this year’s Executive War College. Those speakers include:
David Dexter, MD, clinical and laboratory pathology at M Health Fairview, and Sam Terese, president and CEO at Alverno Laboratories, who will present a strategic case study about the support labs can provide to parent hospitals when navigating new waters.
Paul Wilder, executive director of CommonWell Health Alliance, who will speak on the effort to improve the transferability and portability of patient and healthcare data in ways that improve the quality of care.
“Since the inception of The Dark Report in 1995 there has been continual change both within the US healthcare system and within the profession of laboratory medicine,” noted Robert L. Michel, Dark Daily’s editor-in-chief and creator of the Executive War College. “Now, three decades later, the following three items are imperatives for all labs: controlling costs; having adequate lab staff across all positions; and having enough capital to acquire and deploy new diagnostic technologies, along with the latest information technologies.”
“Most clinical laboratory managers would agree that many of the same operational pain points faced by labs in the 1990s exist today,” said Robert L. Michel (above), founder of the Executive War College. In an interview with Dark Daily, Michel broke down the nuances of this triad of forces and what participants in the Executive War College can expect. (Photo copyright: LabX.)
Forces at Work in Clinical Labs and Pathology Groups
Here’s a more detailed look at each of the forces that Michel noted.
Force 1: An acute shortage of experienced lab scientists
“When you look at the supply-demand for laboratory personnel in the United States today, it is recognized that demand exceeds supply, and that gap continues to widen,” Michel noted. “For example, in the case of anatomic pathologists, the increased number of case referrals grows faster than medical schools can train new pathologists. Currently, the ability of pathology laboratories large and small to hire and retain an adequate number of pathologists is a challenge.”
Executive War College attendees can expect panelists and speakers to highlight creative problem solving techniques to circumvent the challenges labor shortages cause.
Force 2: New applications of artificial intelligence
“Today every instrument vendor, every automation supplier, every software supplier, every service supplier is telling labs that they have artificial intelligence (AI) baked inside,” Michel observed. “It is important for lab managers to understand that a variety of technologies are used by different AI solutions.”
Clinical laboratory managers and pathologists interested in acquiring a deeper understanding of where to start with AI in their lab will find numerous sessions on artificial intelligence at this year’s Executive War College. “There will be a number of sessions this year where clinical labs discuss their success deploying various AI solutions,” Michel said.
Force 3: Financial stress across the entire US healthcare system
“It’s recognized that a significant number of US hospitals and integrated delivery networks (IDNs) are struggling to maintain adequate operating margins,” Michel noted. “This obviously impacts the clinical laboratories serving these hospitals. If the hospitals’ cash flows and operating profit margins are being squeezed, typically the administration comes to the lab team and says, ‘Your budget for next year will be x% less than this year.’
“There are many IDNs and hospital labs where budget cuts have happened for multiple years,” Michel continued. “As a consequence, labs in these hospitals must be nimble to maintain a high-quality menu of diagnostic tests. Several years of such budget cuts by the parent hospital can undermine the ability of the clinical lab team to offer competitive salary packages to attract and retain the clinical lab scientists, pathologists, and clinical chemists they need.”
Recognizing Opportunities in Today’s Lab Market
The good news is that—despite the negative forces acting upon the US healthcare system today—clinical laboratories, genetic testing companies, and anatomic pathology groups have a path forward.
“This path forward is informed by two longstanding precepts recognized by innovative managers. One precept is ‘Change creates new winners and losers.’ The other precept is ‘Change creates opportunity,’” Michel said. “Savvy lab leaders recognize the powerful truths in each precept.
“As healthcare has changed over the past four decades, nearly all the regional and national laboratories that were dominant in 1990, for example, don’t exist today!” he noted. “And yet, even as these lab organizations disappeared, new clinical lab organizations emerged that recognized healthcare’s changes and organized themselves to serve the changing needs of hospitals, office-based physicians, payers, and patients.”
All of these critical topics and more will be covered during the 30th Annual Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management on April 29-30, 2025, at the Hyatt Regency in New Orleans. Signup today to bring your lab’s management team by registering at https://www.executivewarcollege.com.
Cerner and Epic are the industry’s revenue leaders, though smaller vendors remain popular with physician groups
Sales of electronic health record (EHR) systems and related hardware and services reached $31.5 billion in 2018. And those sales will increase, according to a 2019 market analysis from Kalorama Information. This is important information for clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups that must interface with the EHRs of their physician clients to enable electronic transmission of lab orders and test results between doctor and lab.
Kalorama’s ranking includes familiar big EHR manufacturer names—Cerner (NASDAQ:CERN) and Epic—and includes a new name, Change Healthcare, which was born out of Change Healthcare Holding’s merger with McKesson. However, smaller EHR vendors remain popular with many independent physicians.
“We estimate that 40% of the market is not in the top 15 [in total revenue rankings],” said Bruce Carlson, Kalorama’s publisher, in an exclusive interview with Dark Daily. “There’s a lot of room. There are small vendors out there—Amazing Charts, e-MDs, Greenway, NextGen, Athena Health—that show up on a lot of physician surveys.”
“The EHR is really important,” noted Bruce Carlson (above), Publisher at Kalorama. “Since there are a variety of systems—sometimes different from the LIS [laboratory information management system]—you want to make sure you know the vendors and the space.” Carlson says opportunities remain for new entrants in the 700-plus competitor space, which is expected to see continued mergers and acquisitions that will affect clinical laboratories and their client physicians. (Photo copyright: Twitter.)
Interoperability a Key Challenge, as Most Medical
Laboratories Know
Interoperability—or the lack thereof—remains one of the
industry’s biggest challenges. For pathologists, that means seamless electronic
communication between medical laboratories and provider hospitals can be
elusive and can create a backlash against EHR vendors.
Kalorama notes a joint investigation by Fortune and Kaiser Health News (KHN), titled, “Death by a Thousand Clicks: Where Electronic Health Records Went Wrong.” The report details the growing number of medical errors tied to EHRs. One instance involved a California lawyer with herpes encephalitis who allegedly suffered irreversible brain damage due to a treatment delay caused by the failure of a critical lab test order to reach the hospital laboratory. The order was typed into the EHR, but the hospital’s software did not fully interface with the clinical laboratory’s software, so the lab did not receive the order.
“Many software vendors and LIS systems were in use prior to
the real launching of EHRs—the [federal government] stimulus programs,” Carlson
told Dark Daily. “There are a lot of legacy systems that aren’t
compatible and don’t feed right into the EHR. It’s a work in progress.”
Though true interoperability isn’t on the immediate horizon, Carlson expects its arrival within the next five years as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ramps up pressure on vendors.
“I think it is going to be a simple matter eventually,” he
said. “There’s going to be much more pressure from the federal government on
this. They want patients to have access to their medical records. They want one
record. That’s not going to happen without interoperability.”
Other common criticisms of EHRs include:
Wasted provider time: a recent study published in JAMA Internal Medicine notes providers now spend more time in indirect patient care than interacting with patients.
Physician burnout: EHRs have been shown to increase physician stress and burnout.
Not worth the trouble: The debate continues over whether EHRs are improving the quality of care.
Negative patient outcomes: Fortune’s investigation outlines patient safety risks tied to software glitches, user errors, or other flaws.
There’s No Going Back
Regardless of the challenges—and potential dangers—it appears EHRs are here to stay. “Any vendor resistance of a spirited nature is gone. Everyone is part of the CommonWell Health Alliance now,” noted Carlson.
Clinical laboratories and pathology groups should expect
hospitals and health networks to continue moving forward with expansion of
their EHRs and LIS integrations.
“Despite the intensity of attacks on EHRs, very few health systems are going back to paper,” Carlson said in a news release. “Hospital EHR systems are largely in place, and upgrades, consulting, and vendor switches will fuel the market.”
Thus, it behooves clinical laboratory managers and
stakeholders to anticipate increased demand for interfaces to hospital-based
healthcare providers, and even off-site medical settings, such as urgent care
centers and retail health clinics.
Some health IT experts criticize the Government Accountability Office report for ‘incomplete research’ and failure to focus on ‘person-centered interoperability’
Several years after paying billions of incentive dollars to thousands of hospitals and physicians to encourage adoption of electronic health records (EHRs), federal officials remain frustrated at the lack of interoperability among the competing EHR systems. This is a problem recognized by clinical laboratories that must create and maintain interfaces between their laboratory information systems (LISs) and the EHRs of their client physicians.
The GAO’s investigators outlined five barriers to EHR interoperability. They also suggested that meaningful use (MU) requirements present a roadblock to information sharing. (more…)
CommonWell is the name of the new organization formed to create the interoperability that would enable universal access to each patient’s health care records
It was big news in the healthcare IT world when six major healthcare IT companies joined together on March 4 and announced a collaboration intended to develop electronic health record (EHR) systems that are interoperable. That is a goal that can come none too soon for clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups.
The collaboration will take the form of an independent nonprofit organization to be called CommonWell Health Alliance. The six companies contributing to the formation of CommonWell are:
