All Categories chevron icon Imaging Systems chevron icon Imaging Software chevron icon PACS
2011 Category Leader PACS Ambulatory Care

2011 KLAS Category Leader PACS (Ambulatory Care)

Who is theKLAS Category Leader?

See the latest BEST IN KLAS 2018

2024 Best in KLAS Awards - Global Software
2024 GLOBAL
2024 Best in KLAS Awards - Software and Services
2024 BEST IN KLAS

How do PACS solutions compare?


Intelerad Logo
IntelePACS
Konfidence
Average for PACS80.8
50
 
100
 

2

Fujifilm Logo
FUJIFILM Synapse
 
 

3

INFINITT Logo
Infinitt PACS
 
 

4

Novarad Logo
NovaRad NovaPACS
 
 

5

Viztek (Merged to Konica Minolta) Logo
Viztek Opal-RAD PACS
 
 

6

McKesson Logo
Horizon Medical Imaging
 
 

7

Philips Logo
iSite PACS
 
 

8

Merative Logo
DR Systems Unity PACS
 
 

8

RadNet Logo
eRAD PACS
 
 

10

Avreo Logo
interVIEW
 
 

11

Sectra Logo
PACS
 
 

12

Merative Logo
Merge Healthcare PACS (AMICAS)
 
 

13

Aspyra Logo
AccessNET
 
 

14

GE HealthCare Logo
GE Healthcare Centricity PACS-IW
 
Software 0.0
 

Past PACS Awards

2024
PACS 2024 Large - 300K+ Studies Large - 300K+ Studies
PACS 2024 Small - Under 300K Studies Small - Under 300K Studies
2023
PACS 2023 Large - 300K+ Studies Large - 300K+ Studies
PACS 2023 Small - Under 300K Studies Small - Under 300K Studies
2022
PACS 2022 Large - 300K+ Studies Large - 300K+ Studies
PACS 2022 Small - Under 300K Studies Small - Under 300K Studies
2021
PACS 2021 Large - 300K+ Studies Large - 300K+ Studies
PACS 2021 Small - Under 300K Studies Small - Under 300K Studies
2020
PACS 2020 Large - 300K+ Studies Large - 300K+ Studies
PACS 2020 Small - Under 300K Studies Small - Under 300K Studies
2019
PACS 2019 Community Hospital Community Hospital
PACS 2019 Imaging Centers/Ambulatory Imaging Centers/Ambulatory
PACS 2019 Large Hospital / IDN Large Hospital / IDN
2018
PACS 2018 Community Hospital Community Hospital
PACS 2018 Imaging Centers/Ambulatory Imaging Centers/Ambulatory
PACS 2018 Large Hospital/IDN Large Hospital/IDN
2017
PACS 2017 Community Hospital Community Hospital
PACS 2017 Imaging Centers/Ambulatory Imaging Centers/Ambulatory
PACS 2017 Large Hospital/IDN Large Hospital/IDN
2015/2016
PACS 2016 PACS
PACS 2016 Ambulatory Ambulatory
PACS 2016 Community Community
2014
PACS 2014 PACS
PACS 2014 Ambulatory Ambulatory
PACS 2014 Community Community
2013
PACS 2013 1-200 Beds 1-200 Beds
PACS 2013 Ambulatory Care Ambulatory Care
PACS 2013 Large - Over 200 Beds Large - Over 200 Beds
2012
PACS 2012 Ambulatory Care Ambulatory Care
PACS 2012 Community 1-200 Beds Community 1-200 Beds
PACS 2012 Large - Over 200 Beds Large - Over 200 Beds
2011
PACS 2011 Ambulatory Care Ambulatory Care
PACS 2011 Community - 200 or Less Beds Community - 200 or Less Beds
PACS 2011 Large - Over 200 Beds Large - Over 200 Beds
2010
PACS 2010 Ambulatory Care Ambulatory Care
PACS 2010 Large - Over 200 Beds Large - Over 200 Beds
PACS 2010 Small - 1-200 Beds Small - 1-200 Beds
2009
PACS 2009 PACS
PACS 2009 Ambulatory Ambulatory
PACS 2009 Community Community
2008
PACS 2008 PACS
PACS 2008 Ambulatory Ambulatory
PACS 2008 Community Community
2007
PACS 2007 Acute Care Large Acute Care Large
PACS 2007 Ambulatory and Imaging Center Ambulatory and Imaging Center
PACS 2007 Community Community
2006
PACS 2006 Acute Care Large Acute Care Large
PACS 2006 Ambulatory and Imaging Center Ambulatory and Imaging Center
PACS 2006 Community Community
2005
PACS 2005 Acute Care Large Acute Care Large
PACS 2005 Acute Care Small Acute Care Small
PACS 2005 Ambulatory and Imaging Center Ambulatory and Imaging Center
Related ReportsView All Reports
Decision Insights
KLAS article icon
PACS 2023
30 November 23    |   Monique Rasband and Spencer Corbett
The PACS market is in flux—about one in five organizations interviewed by KLAS in the last two years is planning to replace their PACS, and more report they would replace their system if given the opportunity. This market shift is driven largely by organizations (1) replacing aging/legacy technology with go-forward platforms, (2) consolidating platforms, and (3) continuing to move toward unified enterprise imaging strategies. Organizations replacing their PACS are seeking vendor partners with a vision for the future and a strong commitment to innovation. This report examines 90 recent PACS purchase decisions validated by KLAS between September 2021 and September 2023 to understand why certain vendors are being considered, selected, and replaced in this dynamic market.
Performance
KLAS article icon
PACS 2022
08 November 22    |   Monique Rasband and Sidney Tate
The US PACS market is poised for change. Several vendors have made or undergone acquisitions, and some vendors have large customer bases still on legacy solutions. Over 30% of the 368 organizations interviewed for this report are at risk of replacing their current vendor, and organizations are looking for vendor partners to advance their enterprise imaging strategies. Further, industry-wide staff shortages have led to support and innovation challenges among PACS vendors. This report examines how these vendors have addressed this shifting market’s challenges and met the needs of customers with large volumes (300,000+ studies per year) and small/midsize volumes (<300,000 studies per year).
Perception
KLAS article icon
Optum/Change Healthcare Merger
16 August 22    |   Boyd Stewart and Sam Eaquinto
In January 2021, Optum announced their intentions to acquire Change Healthcare. The merger remains unfinalized, however, as the US Department of Justice blocked the deal in February 2022 due to anticompetition concerns—such a merger would give UnitedHealth Group, Optum’s parent company and the nation’s largest insurer, access to rivals’ sensitive data. The legal proceeding is ongoing and scheduled to go to trial August 1, 2022. This report shares Optum and Change Healthcare customers’ reactions to the merger and their perceptions of its impact. Between March 2021 and April 2022, KLAS interviewed 48 individuals from 46 unique organizations; of these respondents, 9% are Optum customers, 56% are Change Healthcare customers, and 35% are customers of both vendors.

Konfidence

Konfidence level
Konfidence Level Description
Products must have at least 30 live organizations participating for software and at least 15 live organizations for professional services. Exception to this is Transcription Services (30).
Products must have at least 20 live organizations participating for software and at least 10 live organizations for professional services. Exception to this is Transcription Services (20).
Products must have at least 15 live organizations participating for software and at least 6 live organizations for professional services. Exception to this is Transcription Services
-
The Konfidence level on this product rating is low. These results are for early trend detection. As more performance data is received, the result is likely to have a wide variance.
We use cookies! We use essential and basic aggregated, depersonalized Google Analytics cookies to provide the type of content which our visitors are most interested in.  Cookie Policy    
​