Home chevron icon Ambulatory & Post Acute Care chevron icon Physician Practice Solutions chevron icon Patient Intake Management

2019 KLAS Category Leader Patient Intake Management


2019 Category Leader Patient Intake Management

Segment Winner

 
 
Konfidence
2yr Trend
 
Culture
Loyalty
Operations
Product
Relationship
Value
Phreesia Logo
Konfidence
2yr Trend
N/A
Average Segment Score84.6
50
 
100
Culture
A
Loyalty
A
Operations
A-
Product
B+
Relationship
B+
Value
A-
 
 

2

OTech Group Logo
Konfidence
2yr Trend
N/A
OTech
 
Culture
B+
Loyalty
A-
Operations
B
Product
B
Relationship
A-
Value
A-
 
 

3

Kyruus Health Logo
Konfidence
2yr Trend
N/A
Epion Health Epion Check-In (athenahealth only)
 
Culture
B+
Loyalty
A-
Operations
B+
Product
B+
Relationship
B
Value
B
 
 

4

AdvancedMD Logo
Konfidence
2yr Trend
N/A
AdvancedPatient
 
Software 81.2
Culture
D
Loyalty
B-
Operations
C+
Product
C+
Relationship
C
Value
D+
 
 

Solutions Not Ranked

Limited Data Products

Score

GetWellNetwork getwell Practice*

85.2

Tonic Health Tonic*

84.0

Component [C], Not Primary [NP], Regional [R] or Limited Market Share [MS]

*Does not meet minimum KLAS Konfidence level.

Trend does not include the Best KLAS score

Light Bulb

Want more insights into this segment?

More information about Patient Intake Management is available via the following KLAS products:

Circle Check Mark
Specialty Reports
Circle Check Mark
User Commentary

Past Patient Intake Management Awards

2024
Patient Intake Management 2024 Patient Intake Management
2023
2022
Patient Intake Management 2022 Patient Intake Management
2021
Patient Intake Management 2021 Patient Intake Management
2020
Patient Intake Management 2020 Patient Intake Management
2019
Patient Intake Management 2019 Patient Intake Management
Related ReportsView All Reports
Performance
KLAS article icon
Patient Self-Scheduling 2024
06 March 24    |   Adam Cherrington and Ciera Walker
As the digital landscape grows in healthcare and other industries, patients are expecting more seamless and convenient access to healthcare and therefore report that self-scheduling is one of their top healthcare engagement priorities . Provider organizations are responding by offering patient self-scheduling functionality to both increase patient convenience and reduce staff burden. This report focuses on five standalone patient self-scheduling solutions to understand their ease of use, why they were chosen over other types of solutions (e.g., EHR functionality), and whether they are worth the money. Additional insights about the broader patient self-scheduling market are also included.
Perception
KLAS article icon
Patient Engagement 2023
15 November 23    |   Adam Cherrington and Spencer Snyder
In an increasingly digital world, the healthcare industry continues to face increased costs and labor shortages. Patient engagement technology is top of mind for healthcare organizations as they work to improve the overall patient experience, increase volumes, cut costs, and create more provider efficiencies. In collaboration with Bain & Company , KLAS recently identified patient engagement as a top-three priority for healthcare investment. For this report, KLAS engaged with executives from 93 unique healthcare organizations to better understand perceptions of the patient engagement market, including strategies for addressing challenges and goals today, which vendors are most aligned with provider goals, and future plans for investment to improve patient engagement.
Performance
KLAS article icon
Patient Engagement Ecosystem 2023
13 July 23    |   Adam Cherrington and Dan Czech
Amid the pressures of today’s economic environment, healthcare organizations are investing heavily in patient engagement technology to help reduce costs, alleviate staffing challenges, and consolidate technology in other areas. Both provider and payer organizations seek to understand what patient engagement capabilities vendors offer that can meet their core needs. This study (along with additional deep-dive content that will be published on KLAS’ website) is an update to KLAS’ 2021 report and shows which vendors report the broadest capability sets, which vendors have made the most progress over the last two years, and how the industry as a whole has matured. For reader ease, links to relevant online content are provided where applicable. Note that the data in this study is based primarily on vendor-reported information, accompanied by a limited amount of KLAS performance data.
Perception
KLAS article icon
Patient Perspectives on Patient Engagement Technology 2022
26 May 22    |   Adam Cherrington and Dan Czech
The pandemic has emphasized the need for healthcare organizations to better accommodate patients’ needs and decrease barriers to effective care. However, patients are frequently absent from discussions around healthcare information technology (HIT). In KLAS’ previous report on the patient perspective , we discovered a lack of alignment between patients’ engagement technology priorities and those of provider organizations and vendors. Since then, KLAS has sought to gain a deeper understanding of what is needed from vendors and providers to drive greater alignment with patients. This report seeks to highlight the patient voice and is one of many KLAS initiatives aimed at more deeply understanding and measuring the patient perspective on HIT.
Performance
KLAS article icon
Patient Experience Improvement 2021
02 December 21    |   Adam Cherrington, Ciera Walker and Tyler Sycamore
Provider organizations’ efforts to improve the patient experience have typically relied on standardized, retrospective benchmarking data (predominantly from the CMS-regulated CAHPS survey). However, to really amplify the voice of the patient and meet the rising demands of healthcare consumerism, organizations also need customizable tools that allow them to respond to patient feedback in real time and quickly identify service-recovery options. This report examines the opportunity that exists for the industry to augment a CAHPS-centric approach with more customizable capabilities.

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    
​