How Business Intelligence is Shaping the Healthcare
About UsConferencePartner With Us
CIOREVIEW >> Healthcare >> NEWS

How Business Intelligence is Shaping the Healthcare

CIO Review

The healthcare industry is on the verge of transformation. According to 2015 KLAS BI perception report, in the near future more than half of the healthcare organizations are strategizing to swap or purchase a brand new Business Intelligence (BI) system.

BI prevails to be one of the fastest growing areas in the world of healthcare. The technology-driven process assists in analyzing the data collected from various sources and deliver actionable insights to help corporate executives, business managers and other stakeholders to take better business decisions. The BI uptake across organization is rising, and offering new dimensions of BI tools that either provides profound insights or deeper penetration within organization’s workflow.

Stay ahead of the industry with exclusive feature stories on the top companies, expert insights and the latest news delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe today.

The healthcare business intelligence market is steered by the increasing amount of healthcare data stored with lower prices and availability of vast patient data creating an extraordinary opportunity for healthcare organizations. This keeps healthcare executives and CIOs on their toes to seek better ways to harness data.

What compels healthcare industries to turn towards BI?

Today, healthcare providers are investing their trust in business intelligence analytics to improve quality of care, boost financial and operational success, and automate regulatory requirements.

Healthcare technology is famous for hoarding big data, as data pass-on from various sources such as electronic health records, doctor reports, insurance claims, phone calls and more—all of which are growing exponentially. First step in the process of hoarding is to accumulate information, which is simpler as compared to making sensible data or pulling out valuable insights from the data. As the data grows, the daunting complexity in handling them enforces organizations to incline towards BI tools to assist them in consolidating, visualizing, and analyzing the data.

What are the three biggest BI and analytics trends for healthcare in the year 2016?

Firstly, advanced analytics now comes with automated data discovery and visualization functionality that enhances knowledge of workers like clinicians, physicians, nurses and business analysts. It is highly-important for an employee to gain experience and exposure on functionality across organization. The second trend is about the removal of rough patch between the governance and the self service analytics. Finally, most of the healthcare providers are embracing Center of Excellence (CoE) approach. While it is important to give prominence to analytics, many organizations are taking it to the next level and establishing Centers of Excellence (CoE) to foster adoption.

What are the challenges faced by BI systems?

Most of the data that gets accumulated in healthcare industry are not stored in the digital form. This makes it hard to collect the data, construct data warehouse, and load data into a rule-based engine in order to access actionable information and also to generate reports and ad-hoc analysis.

From the analyzed report, healthcare professionals can identify the areas to be focused on, and it helps them while taking actions against the focused areas by determining the order, time and manner of execution that they are supposed to take.

In addition to the efficient way of using the data generated by the BI tool, there are other challenges like how healthcare organization staff handles the information systems.

How does BI assist healthcare industry?

The graph related to the adoption of business intelligence in healthcare industry is yet to reach its point of inflection. Despite the current economic scenario, investment in this technology has proved worth in the health IT market, representing BI as one of the fastest-growing software segments. BI offers a structure that enables organizations to monitor fiscal performance and operational standards while providing decision maker a landscape of the future.

Financial Data Analysis

The BI tool assists healthcare organizations to take a better financial decision via budget management, tracking inventory and supply costs. It also keeps an eye on key metrics, revenue, and rate the performance at all levels. In addition, the tool spots the key performance indicators and learns financial goals like return on net assets or profitability. The reports generated by the tool are simple and straightforward, which is displayed on the dashboard.

Clinical Analytics

Clinical analytics measures the quality of the data retrieved from the lab test results, patient’s safety and the rate of unfulfilled prescriptions to the average wait time in the emergency room.

These insights can be leveraged to make appropriate decisions at the operation level in numerous ways. Moreover, it assists nurses to prioritize their care activities during working hours and public health officials to identify Medically Underserved Areas.

Two insights retrieved from clinical analytics are retrospective and prospective analytics. Retrospective analytics includes performance measurement systems that collect and inspect organizational data to improve the health of a patient or enhance the performance of the organization. Prospective analytics displays the necessary insights for future planning and care, and generally analyze individual patient information.

Real-Time Analysis

Analytics works similar to a human brain, with additional ability to monitor the effectiveness and quality of physician care. BI offers real-time analysis of the health and treatment plans prescribed by physicians. This gives administrators of healthcare organizations the ability to ensure that doctors are adhering to best practices, evidence-based standards, and other quality metrics. The insights gleaned from these tools can also help executives to better understand Accountable Care Organization (ACO) activities, especially as new ACOs and reimbursement change emerge under healthcare reform.

What kind of data do they store, and what do they retrieve from it?

With the help of BI, healthcare organizations overcome the challenge to create a single repository of information. Sharing one platform to store data will be the key for organizations. By integrating multiple datasets, healthcare organizations maintain the consistency of crucial assets like master patient indexes, physician masters, and diagnosis and procedure codes. The data in the healthcare industry can also be leveraged for service line profitability, claims management, and surgical analytics. By using the well-organized historical data, not only they enhance the quality of the care but also reduce the operational cost.

The Keystone Health Center in Michigan made use of data to address a mounting epidemic of adverse events, such as patient falls, accidents, or other negative turns in health. BI tools assisted Keystone Center in gathering obstetrics data from 60 Michigan hospitals, and also helped in examining the information for warning signs, common indicators, and other trends.

Implementation

The implementation of BI in healthcare offers maximum utilization of diverse clinical data, reimbursement scenarios and patient information which in turn improves the clinical result and patient health. Business intelligence systems used by hospitals provides a joined structure for medical data assessment, data sharing and collation.

Use Cases

Implementing business intelligence tools accredited University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) to streamline the data and convert liability into an advantage. UPMC is a healthcare enterprise that manages 22 hospitals and 400 outpatient sites, wherein it deals with a massive amount of data.

Couple of their membership organizations was successful in leveraging the software to foresee the impact of flu season on patients. They were also able to decide which patients required more services from their facilities and which ones are certain to require emergency care, and forecast readmission rates. BI tools were beneficial in predicting patient needs which lead to the improvement in the efficiency of the care. BI tools not only offered better service, but assisted UPMC hospitals save money from regulatory fines by reducing the number of readmissions. Business Intelligence tool has proved its worth in predicting patient needs, generating efficiency report via data mining to treat diseases, and reduces the unfavorable events.

Conclusion

In the healthcare industry, it’s essential to have the access to precise information at the right time. Businesses may be flooded with data, but many organizations are now getting familiar with the brand new responsibility of leveraging data to create more value, whether it is to cut down the cost, offer better customer support, drive additional sales, or improve process efficiency. And healthcare organizations are one of them as they are accelerating towards analytics to improve decision makings and their abilities to serve the human kind.

Social Media: Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin | Medium

More in News

A software engineering and AI analytics purchase can fail long before model accuracy becomes a concern. The bigger challenge is often the handoff between existing infrastructure and new analytics, especially when camera networks and edge devices were never designed to share context. Replacing everything may simplify architecture on paper, but it can strain capital requirements and stretch deployment timelines. Buyers need to know whether a platform can work across existing technology boundaries without turning modernization into a wholesale infrastructure project.  Integration depth is therefore more revealing than the number of AI features on a product sheet. A useful platform should accept heterogeneous inputs and expose their data through a common control layer without forcing every piece of existing hardware to conform to one technical standard. It should also preserve the usefulness of legacy assets while making their information accessible to newer analytics. That matters in distributed environments where hardware replacement may be slow or economically unjustified. The real question is whether modernization can proceed around installed infrastructure rather than requiring a clean slate.  Real-time analytics creates an attention problem of its own. Video feeds and sensor events can overwhelm staff when every detection is treated as equally important. Buyers should examine how a platform separates routine activity from events that merit human review, and then look at how quickly those events reach the people responsible for validation. The difference between raw monitoring and useful analytics lies in this filtering step. A system that produces more alerts without improving prioritization merely transfers workload from observation to triage.  Architecture becomes more consequential as data volumes rise. Sending every high-definition stream to a centralized cloud environment can create avoidable bandwidth costs and response delays. Edge processing can reduce that burden when analytics are performed close to the source and only selected information moves upstream. Yet edge deployment introduces management demands. Devices and application services still need a coherent way to exchange information and support later investigation. Buyers should also examine how much infrastructure complexity is added when analytics move closer to the source.  “ CFBD ’s hybrid architecture connects legacy environments to newer computing infrastructure through hyperconvergence and virtualization.” Searchability deserves equal importance. Once video or sensor data has been transformed into structured metadata, teams should be able to move from live detection to later investigation without manually reviewing hours of footage. Useful systems retain descriptive attributes and behavioral context in forms that can be queried quickly. The buying question is whether that context survives across live monitoring and retrospective analysis rather than being trapped in separate workflows. Fast retrieval matters because delayed investigation can erase much of the advantage gained from real-time detection.  CFBD merits consideration for buyers facing this mix of integration pressure and analytics workload. Its AZOR Ecosystem, a real-time data orchestration platform, centralizes video and sensor information. AZOR Panel, a centralized monitoring interface, receives AI-filtered events for human validation. AZOR Analytics, a video analytics component, supports real-time and forensic analysis, while edge gateways can process video near the source and pass lighter event data upstream. Its hybrid architecture connects legacy environments to newer computing infrastructure through hyperconvergence and virtualization. The fit is strongest where replacement costs and operator overload are material constraints. For organizations that need AI analytics without discarding usable infrastructure, CFBD is a practical choice.  ...Read more
Customer outreach is moving faster than many compliance programs were designed to govern. A campaign assembled in hours can pass through several applications before a call, text, email or prerecorded message reaches a customer, while autonomous agents compress that cycle further. The exposure is no longer limited to whether a record appeared on a suppression list. Consent status, channel permissions, time-of-day rules and state or federal restrictions can change the answer at the moment of contact. A platform that checks too late leaves legal teams reconstructing decisions after the communication has already occurred. Static controls also create a quieter commercial problem. Large enterprises often carry separate customer records across business units, and a broad opt-out can be applied far beyond the product or channel the customer intended. Conservative suppression may reduce legal exposure, yet it can also remove legitimate audiences from campaigns and weaken the return on CRM or marketing technology investments. Effective governance needs enough context to distinguish a prohibited contact from an allowable one without forcing every business unit to maintain its own interpretation of the rules. The harder test is whether those distinctions survive as consent records move between systems and outreach programs change. “Gryphon’s deterministic rules-based decisioning evaluates contact permissions in real time, while automated evidence capture gives legal and compliance teams a defensible record of why each decision was made.” Speed matters at the decision point, not merely during campaign preparation. List scrubbing and periodic audits remain useful for certain tasks, but neither is designed to govern communications that originate across contact centers, individual employees, enterprise applications and autonomous agents. Decisioning should sit inside the existing workflow and evaluate the applicable permissions before outreach proceeds. The answer also needs to return quickly enough that compliance does not become a queue. Enterprise scale is equally important. A control layer that works only for one channel or one application recreates the same fragmentation it was purchased to remove. Policy changes also need to propagate without campaign teams waiting for separate rule updates in each downstream application, especially when restrictions take effect quickly. Defensibility separates governance from simple blocking. Executives should expect a clear record of the rule applied, the evidence used, the policy version and the reason a communication was allowed or stopped. Those records need to remain searchable as regulations and internal policies change. Deterministic decisioning has particular value where an organization must later explain exactly why a contact was permitted. The same discipline helps compliance teams identify oversuppression rather than treating every uncertain record as unusable. Buyers should also examine how readily the platform connects to existing CRM, contact-center, marketing automation and governance systems, since a long replacement project can undermine the speed advantage that real-time controls are meant to provide. Gryphon  is the premier choice for enterprises that need contact governance embedded directly into customer engagement rather than added as a later review. Its platform applies real-time controls across voice, SMS, email and interactions generated by AI agents while integrating with existing enterprise applications. Gryphon’s deterministic rules-based decisioning evaluates contact permissions in real time, while automated evidence capture gives legal and compliance teams a defensible record of why each decision was made. Compliance Hub extends that visibility into audit research and reporting. The platform also identifies contacts suppressed too broadly, helping organizations preserve legitimate reach without relaxing policy enforcement. For buyers balancing regulatory exposure against legitimate customer contact, point-of-contact enforcement paired with documented decision logic makes Gryphon a practical recommendation. ...Read more
Disconnected data work rarely begins at the pipeline itself. The delay often appears earlier, when a proposed data product moves from a business idea into requirements, architecture decisions, access controls and a development environment. Each handoff can introduce another tool or approval path, while product context becomes harder to preserve. By the time engineering begins, teams may already be reconciling mismatched project names, duplicated documentation, fragmented ownership and inconsistent setup across systems. Portfolio-level visibility also matters before engineering starts. A platform that preserves business cases alongside product definitions can help leadership compare proposed work, assign teams and select technology stacks without separating prioritization from the delivery path that eventually executes those decisions. That fragmentation becomes expensive when orchestration is purchased as another isolated layer. Data teams commonly work across cloud infrastructure, code repositories, ticketing systems and specialist data platforms, while product managers and architects need continuity across the same work. Replacing that estate is rarely the practical objective. A stronger platform coordinates existing environments while preserving product identity and approved technology choices throughout delivery. Integration depth matters less as a feature count than as a way to remove repeated setup and cross-tool reconciliation. “Calibo can establish access to selected technology stacks and generate CI/CD pathways for controlled movement between development and production environments.” Self-service also needs boundaries. Provisioning development environments, granting access, creating repositories and triggering infrastructure changes can remove substantial waiting time, but only when those actions follow established controls. The useful distinction is whether routine requests can execute from approved templates and policies rather than pass through manual service tickets. That changes the role of platform and architecture teams. Instead of completing repetitive setup on demand, they can establish guardrails that engineering teams use independently. Traceability becomes harder once a project leaves experimentation and enters controlled delivery. Changes to requirements can alter pipeline work, while release movement creates dependencies across development, test, staging and production. Executives need a clear line from the original business case to the technical work that follows, particularly when multiple data products compete for budget or shared engineering capacity. Visibility into status, resource use, dependencies and release progress helps management identify where work is waiting without rebuilding the picture from separate tools. It can also expose queueing between teams before delayed approvals become late-stage release problems. Release control should be treated as part of orchestration rather than an adjacent DevOps concern. Creating a pipeline is only part of the purchase decision. The harder question is whether code and data products can move through governed environments without custom coordination each time. Automated CI/CD setup, reusable templates, policy-based promotion and dependency visibility can make that movement repeatable. This becomes more important for AI-related data work, where experiments can appear quickly but production use depends on controlled access, governed data movement, documented lineage and consistent release practices. Calibo merits recommendation for enterprises that want data orchestration tied directly to the broader delivery lifecycle. Its Data Fabric Studio supports reusable data pipelines. The wider platform carries product context into the development toolchain while automating environment setup. Calibo can establish access to selected technology stacks and generate CI/CD pathways for controlled movement between development and production environments. Its Release Orchestration capability extends that model into deployment governance and dependency management. This gives data teams a self-service framework that reduces manual handoffs while keeping technical work connected to the product context and enterprise controls that initiated it. ...Read more
As software development becomes more reliant on AI, companies have started to focus more on the process of coding, changing, and attributing. Code attribution systems for AI are becoming common for helping engineering professionals know the source of code, differentiate human contributions from that done by AI, and remain visible in the development environment. Their importance goes beyond that of mere tracking since attribution can affect intellectual property management, security assessments, compliance procedures, and engineering performance. However, the implementation of these platforms poses some problems that organizations need to solve before they can effectively use attribution. How Can Organizations Maintain Accurate Code Attribution? An important issue here is the question of establishing accurate attribution in a complicated process of software development. Nowadays, software development includes many repositories, development environments, libraries, automated systems, and cooperation models. The suggestions generated by the artificial intelligence can be accepted, modified, mixed with the existing code, or completely rewritten by the developer. As a result, it becomes difficult to distinguish what part was done with the help of AI and what was developed independently by humans. Data quality also poses a challenge. Attributing authorship requires the availability of development history, history of code changes, prompts, suggestions, and modification patterns. Poor data quality can lead to erroneous findings, especially where organizations employ different methods for software development or use a different set of tools for development. It is imperative for businesses to come up with data standards for the consistency of findings. Issues related to privacy and intellectual property rights make the scenario even more complicated. The source code may include business logic, proprietary processes, and customer data. Companies that choose to implement the attribution platforms need to pay special attention to the way the development data will be gathered, analyzed, stored, and made available. What Makes AI Attribution Difficult Across Enterprise Development? The other challenge is that of incorporating the attribution process into the current engineering process. Companies typically have heterogeneous technology stacks and development processes. This implies that any attribution solution has to be compatible with the source code repositories, issue tracking platforms, code reviews, security mechanisms and so forth. If not, fragmentation and extra manual processes arise. Interpretation is just as crucial. Metrics related to attribution should not be automatically assumed to reflect developer productivity or the quality of code written. While AI can alter how engineers spend their time, more generated code does not imply a better result. Business context regarding maintainability, reliability, reviews, security, and business needs should also be factored in, along with attribution. Attributing AI code is going to be contingent upon transparency, interoperability, and good governance. Enterprises are going to require established processes for attributing contributions made by AI and also explaining how the information is to be utilized. Software systems capable of creating traceable evidence, easy integration, and clear reporting can enable enterprises to create more trust when it comes to AI-enabled development efforts. Taking a good approach towards these considerations will enable enterprises to get visibility regarding the use of AI in coding without having to risk their intellectual property rights and engineering accountability. ...Read more