According to HIMSS’s 2021 survey, 73% of healthcare delivery organizations have legacy information systems. They are expensive to maintain and a pain to keep up.
The question is, what to do with them?
Healthcare IT News spoke with Tony Jaros, CEO of Legacy Data Access, to discuss his views on legacy IT systems and how inflation, the great resignation is affecting professionals internal expertise with legacy systems and a strategy to phase out legacy systems after a merger or acquisition.
H. That HIMSS survey found that 73% of healthcare organizations still operate legacy systems, which are expensive to support. You suggest we should see a trend around this because of inflation. What do you see supplier organizations doing?
ONE. On the surface, the HIMSS data is a bit confusing. While the percentages you cite are correct, the same study reported that IT leaders considered legacy systems their third biggest security risk. So if they know that not taking down these systems will leave them vulnerable to data breaches, why don’t they do it?
The problem is threefold: risk, cost, and hassle. Let’s tackle the cost component, given our challenging economy. Upfront fees for decommissioning legacy systems can add up quickly for organizations with complex IT environments and possibly looking to preserve cash.
One trend we’re seeing is that IT leaders are looking for more flexibility and transparency in healthcare data storage pricing, and they’re pushing storage providers in this space to be both open and optional. Only then can the burden of storage costs be overcome.
H. The great resignation drained senior IT expertise. You said the impact of high-level IT rotation is a top concern for health systems, and as service organizations prepare to implement IT initiatives this year, they need to a plan to deal with legacy systems that new IT leaders may not have experience with. Please explain.
ONE. Many of the legacy systems that are still running in healthcare organizations today are quite outdated. Typically, only the most experienced IT staff — many of whom are retiring or transitioning into healthcare jobs — have in-depth knowledge of these systems.
Newer incoming talent may be hesitant to mess with existing infrastructure for fear of damaging something and losing valuable data. It is also less likely that experienced healthcare organization newcomers decommission these types of systems, resulting in only one more reason to delay work.
As a result, the burden shifts to the hosting provider to be an appeaser not only by demonstrating experience but, more importantly, by sharing their knowledge and educating healthcare IT teams. Strong.
Each retirement should be seen as an opportunity to enhance the skills of IT professionals and help them not only feel more comfortable in their environment but also more secure in their decisions around employment. promote data storage projects. This is part of removing the burden of risk.
Q. You said that getting rid of legacy systems after a merger or acquisition of the healthcare industry can be very complicated. How do provider organizations develop a plan that defines who will extract, validate, maintain, and protect data from legacy systems to reduce risks associated with healthcare M&A?
ONE. Acquired healthcare organizations often turn to acquirer platforms to take advantage of licensing costs, support, functionality, and most importantly, ubiquity. As a result, system decommissioning will almost always be a possible scenario in healthcare M&A.
Because the acquired entity will typically be smaller, the groups will be leaner. It is therefore the responsibility of the acquirer to devise a defined strategy for data management before any purchase is made – for example, which systems will be retained and discarded, the downtime schedule /hosting, what local regulations/laws will need to be made compliant, and more.
In addition, the acquirer can provide human resources to strengthen the acquired organization’s IT knowledge base and even have pre-negotiated rates with the data storage partner for new subsidiaries. which the acquirer may pay directly or as a reimbursement to the acquired entity.
The more work that is done up front to determine how data management will be handled, the less time it will take in the back-end to bring the data strategies of two or more entities together.
