KLAS Contact
Contact KLAS
Contact KLAS
2024 BEST IN KLAS
Preferences
Related Series
2007
2005
Related Segments
Cardiology PACS 2006
The Cardiology PACS report presents providers and vendors with a snapshot of today’s CPACS vendor offerings as well as an assessment of relative strengths and weaknesses against one another and all the HIT vendors in the KLAS Database.
Findings of Interest
- Of those who have chosen a PACS solution, Functionality (35 percent) was the most common reason a vendor was selected, followed by Vendor Relationship (28 percent), Cost (16 percent) and Technology/Architecture (16 percent). Functionality (35 percent) was the most common reason a vendor was typically not selected followed by Technology/Architecture (24 percent).
- Respondents indicated that report distribution is done manually 42 percent of the time, by the CPACS solution vendor 26 percent of the time, and by a third-party vendor 32 percent of the time.
- Providers used the physician reporting capabilities of their CPACS vendor 59 percent of the time, manual dictation 27 percent, reporting from another vendor 13 percent, and homegrown one percent.
- Respondents to the surveys for this research indicated that their hemodynamics solution came from their CPACS vendor 32 percent of the time and from another vendor 56 percent of the time with 12 percent of the healthcare facilities indicating that they had no cath lab.
Vendors Included in the Study
The report details product/vendor scoring for the following vendors:
- AGFA
- AGILENT
- DELTA IMAGING
- DIGISONICS
- EMAGEON
- GE
- GOODROE
- IDX
- LUMEDX
- MCKESSON
- MERGE
- OPTIMED
- PHILIPS
- PROSOLV
- QUINTON
- SCIMAGE
- SIEMENS
- TOSHIBA
Benefit from the advice of 251 providers in this 359-page report.
This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2024 KLAS Research, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.