Independent cardiology groups are weighing new affiliations while many hospital-affiliated practices are reevaluating their alignments. During a recent discussion hosted by Becker’s Healthcare and NextGen Healthcare, leaders discussed the shifts and the operational and technological hurdles cardiology practices face today.
Panelists included Ben Diestel, general manager at Florida Cardiovascular Associates of America; Brandon Theophilus, general manager of specialty care at NextGen Healthcare; Josh Ginsberg, executive director at The Heart House; and Dana Jacoby, founder and CEO of Vector Medical Group.
Key themes from their discussion of survey results from 136 cardiology practices are summarized below.
1. Ownership models in flux
According to the survey, 42% of practices are affiliated with a hospital or health system, 30% are privately owned and 28% are part of a consolidator or private equity (PE)-backed group. Among independent practices, all indicated they are exploring affiliation options, while 65% of affiliated groups are actively exploring independence
Mr. Ginsberg cited the challenges of transitioning to value-based care as a key driver for those results.
“We didn’t necessarily have the competency or skillset by which to prepare ourselves for the move from volume to value,” Mr. Ginsberg said. “We’re seeing more and more of the Medicare patients move into Medicare Advantage plans and it’s putting groups like mine in a position where we need to have the backing as well as the expertise to be able to move into that value-based base.”
Ms. acoby echoed this sentiment, noting that escalating restrictive covenants are prompting affiliated physicians to look outward. Despite many practices considering ownership changes, only 25% of affiliated groups feel prepared for such transitions, with nearly half feeling only somewhat prepared.
Ms. Jacoby emphasized the importance of due diligence with practices needing a current operational, clinical, and financial assessment to be ready.
“Our cardiologists have options right now,” Ms. Jacoby said. “Hospital alignment and arrangements seemingly are more controlling for some doctors and they’re realizing that they should look at their physician services agreements. They have the opportunity to look outside.”
2. Operational burdens dominate
Administrative complexity, revenue pressures, staffing shortages and outdated infrastructure topped the list of operational challenges across ownership models. Independent practices reported limited patient experience tools, integration issues, and revenue cycle challenges with their EHRs.
Mr. Diestel emphasized staffing as a critical issue across functions from patient access to clinical support and the importance for practices to understand technology as an enabler rather than a burden for staff.
“You’re seeing it in every part of a cardiovascular practice right now,” Mr. Diestel said. “We’re making a pretty big effort investing a lot of time and resources on how we implement AI to combat that. As much as AI helps to not only drive efficiency, it also is a great staff retention tool because you’re able to keep your best staff and make sure they’re happy in the place they want to be.”
3. EHR frustrations persist
EHRs were a recurring source of dissatisfaction, especially among independent and hospital-affiliated practices. Limitations cited included poor integration, limited cardiovascular clinical content and weak reporting.
Mr. Theophilus acknowledged the shortcomings of legacy EHR platforms primarily because of a rush to get them to market and less maturity in their application.
He also highlighted that many cardiology groups are addressing operational gaps with disconnected, single-point solutions, which leads to data silos and inefficiencies. He emphasized the value of integrated platforms that streamline workflows and improve data communication, something NextGen is proud to help deliver at scale.
“We’re leveraging technology to create more efficiency inside the practice, open up better patient access, communicate with those patients in a more rapid, timely fashion in the means with which those patients want to be communicated all the way through the provider and their documentation,” said Mr. Theophilus.
Both Mr. Diestel and Mr. Ginsberg acknolwedge that implementation, not availability, is the key challenge. While tools are available, deploying them efficiently at scale is what most organizations struggle with.
4. AI adoption gaining traction
AI emerged as a bright spot for improving both administrative and clinical performance. Across practice types, respondents identified billing and coding, diagnostics, documentation and patient communication as the most promising use cases.
Ms. Jacoby noted its potential in early detection and patient monitoring while Mr. Diestel highlighted diagnostic use cases: Mr.Ginsberg added that AI can enhance patient communication while giving clinicians more time to focus on patient care. All panelists agreed however, that AI needs to have a clear function for organizations with structure in place.
“There’s a lot more to the silver magic bullet than just let’s adopt AI,” Ms. Jacoby said. “It’s really critical that you have a plan in place before just adopting AI across your entire platform. We’re very much seeing AI be a massive shift in a lot of the ways that our providers have done things and a much needed solution to some of the clunky nature of cardiology and clunky nature of healthcare.”
From technology transformation to ownership transitions, cardiology practices are navigating complex terrain. But with strategic clarity and a focus on patient outcomes, the panelists agreed, sustainable success is within reach.
“If you focus on the patient and you make the patient the center of everything you’re doing, it’s probably headed in the right direction,” Mr. Ginsberg said. “No matter how far we go with AI, technology or complicated structures, if you just focus on the patient, then things will work out.”
Leave a Reply