Ambulatory care organizations continue to navigate growing complexity across clinical, operational, and financial workflows. As expectations rise for efficiency, revenue growth, platform scalability, and patient engagement, many leaders are reassessing whether their core EHR and PM platforms can serve as a true foundation or whether third-party solutions are still required to meet their everyday needs.
In our recently published Comprehensive Ambulatory Care EHR & PM Suites report, we examine how mid-to-large (11 or more physicians) ambulatory care organizations are approaching this question. By looking at functionality adoption, third-party use, and reported outcomes, the data offers a clear view into when comprehensive suites deliver value and where gaps remain.
Alignment Across Core EHR & PM Solutions Drives the Most Consistent Outcomes
Across the data, alignment between platform solutions consistently emerges as a differentiator. Organizations that adopt multiple components from their primary vendor and use them in a coordinated way most often report outcomes tied to operational execution, especially among Epic and athenahealth customers.
The most frequently cited benefits include workflow efficiency, improved reporting and regulatory support, and the value of operating within a single, unified platform. Fewer respondents point to downstream effects such as provider satisfaction or patient experience, and relatively few cite direct cost savings. This distribution suggests that the primary value of aligned suites lies in operational consistency and data manageability rather than experiential or financial gains.
Comprehensive Suites Limit Fragmentation but Do Not Eliminate Third-Party Use
Even as more organizations default to solutions from their core EHR/PM vendor, third-party tools remain a common part of the ambulatory care technology landscape. Nearly all respondents report supplementing their core platform in at least some areas, though the scope and purpose of that supplementation vary.
In some cases, healthcare organizations describe their third-party tools as targeted additions that extend otherwise capable core platforms. In other cases, organizations report heavier reliance on external tools to address functionality or workflow gaps they feel are not consistently met within the core suite. Third-party adoption is not inherently a reflection of dissatisfaction but rather a response to how well core systems meet specific operational needs.
Patient-Facing & Operational Functions Are Supplemented Most Often
Across the market, third-party use tends to concentrate in a relatively small set of functional areas. Areas such as patient engagement, patient intake, telehealth, credentialing, and portals are most consistently reported for third-party use.
While the degree of reliance varies by organization and vendor, these functional areas are repeatedly identified as places where respondents expect their core EHR/PM vendor to deliver stronger or more mature capabilities. The prevalence of supplementation suggests that, for many organizations, foundational functionality may exist within the core suite but does not always fully support operational expectations.
Missing or Immature Functionality Drives Most Third-Party Decisions
The most commonly cited reason organizations turn to third-party solutions is missing or immature functionality. This reason is mentioned more frequently than cost considerations, speed of implementation, or existing vendor relationships.
Other commonly reported drivers include limitations in how available tools support organizational workflows and the need for more advanced capabilities sooner than core vendor road maps allow. Together, these responses indicate that third-party adoption decisions are largely driven by practical considerations tied to daily operations rather than preference alone.
Suite Strategy Remains a Balancing Act
Overall, the data shows that comprehensive EHR and PM suites can support meaningful operational outcomes, but they are not universally self-sufficient. Organizations that report the most success tend to pair broad adoption with strong implementation, integration, and governance practices.
At the same time, third-party tools continue to play an important role, either as targeted complements or as necessary gap-fillers, depending on the strength of the core platform. Understanding where a suite delivers consistent value and where supplementation is likely to be required remains a critical part of long-term IT strategy.
For a deeper look at how organizations are using comprehensive EHR and PM suites from various vendors, where third parties are most commonly introduced, and what outcomes are being realized, we encourage you to read the full Comprehensive Ambulatory Care EHR & PM Suites 2026 report below.
© tigercat_lpg / Adobe Stock
