Low-code EHR vs. traditional development – what choice is correct?

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are the “must be” backbone of healthcare, helping healthcare providers manage their patients’ data efficiently and inline with regulatory standards. Thus, when searching for an HER any healthcare organization faces a crucial decision: “Should we build our EHR solution using a low-code platform or select “traditional development”?

Before decisions are made, let’s improve our understanding of what is low-code and traditional development.

What is low-code and traditional software development?

Low-code platforms provide development environment with visual tools, applications being developed mainly using “small ready-for-use bricks” – drag-and-drop components, pre-defined templates etc. i.e. with the minimal manual coding.

Traditional development involves building an EHR system from scratch using programming languages like Microsoft .NET, Java, Python, PHP and others together with database management systems like Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL etc. Any way you will select may bring success of defeat, but let’s try to analyze the strong and week points of each of these two approaches:

Low-code EHR pros:

  • Shorter time from the contract to ready-to-use EHR.
  • Usually lower development costs – as consequence of the previous advantage.
  • Cheaper Maintenance – changes of the low-code Electronic Health Record system may be done by lower qualified and less expensive staff.

Low-code EHR cons:

  • Limited customization capacity – low-code EHR platform has limitations of fine tuning according by provider’ specific needs, it might be impossible of extremely expensive to tailor unique workflows for your medical business.
  • Scalability limitations – scaling is one of common bottle neck when your business is extended in terms of staff, patients, provided services and geography (ex. when you launch multi-location business).
  • EHR performance constraints – performance optimization can be really challenging for low-code platform comparing with fully customizable traditionally developed software. Traditional development ensures code-level control over the system’s performance, architecture, features and security.

Traditional EHR development pros:

  • Full customization – traditional development of your EHR will allow you the full control over every aspect of the system. This is important for all providers, but especially for those who pay special attention to optimization their business processes. So, if you are lucky enough to find a professional development team, you will get an EHR exactly tailored to your needs.
  • High security compliance – traditionally developed systems may have advanced security features, tailored to your organization needs.
  • Higher performance optimization potential – developers can fine-tune the code and database for high-load performance. This is extremely important when you choose an EHR for long-term use. EHR is your costly asset, so it is highly desirable that it serves you for many years.
  • Long-term cost efficiency – yes, the upfront costs are usually higher comparing to low-code development. However, you will avoid high dependence on a low-code platform vendor, who will likely take advantage of this dependency and charge higher fees compared to the open market.
  • High scalability – enterprise-grade and multi-facility healthcare providers healthcare require EHR platform with high scalability potential.

Traditional EHR development cons:

  • Longer implementation time – traditional development of EHR takes longer time comparing with low-code system.
  • Higher upfront costs – traditional development requires a team of skilled developers and designers, increasing initial expenses.
  • Integration challenges – traditionally developed HR system may require extensive Application Programming Interface (API) development for seamless interoperability with other information systems.

So, what choice is correct?

This is not an easy decision. It depends on the available budget, time, effort you are ready to spend, your long-term goals and the risks you are willing to take.

Is any universal solution? Yes!

There is no universal solution, but we may recommend you how to take advantage from both low-code and traditional EHR development. The most likely solution is to select EHR vendor who already has a traditionally developed EHR and who may customize EHR according your specific needs.  

You may take all advantages of both approaches:

  • Relatively short development like with low-code system – vendor will spend time for customization, not for development your EHR from scratch.
  • Less upfront costs – this is direct consequence of short implementation period. Ideally – to agree the gradual payment as the work progresses.
  • High customization potential – you will not be constrained by low-code “ready-for-use bricks”.
  • High scalability potential and performance – EHR will be tuned to match any high-load and business extension current and future requirements.
  • High integration potential – usually, an existing EHR already has APIs for integration with other information systems.

What about Intellia EHR?

Intellia EHR is a great example of a hybrid approach, combining the advantages of both low-code and traditionally developed Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems. It allows you to analyze its existing functionalities to determine which features are acceptable ‘as is,’ which need adjustments, and which must be developed from scratch.

Intellia EHR covers most of the common needs of primary care providers, allowing us to focus on your specific requirements. With full control over our source code, we can tailor Intellia EHR precisely to your needs.

Intellia EHR includes a Data Exchange Component, enabling seamless integration with other information systems via web services (API) based on the FHIR standard.

And, finally, we can negotiate the payment schedule to prevent expenses from impacting your business.