Premium Reports
Computed Radiography 2007

Computed Radiography 2007

July 11, 2007

Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 9/20/2020 4:03:41 AM and Model.reportId = 404

Find out why healthcare providers rated the CR Systems vendors favorably with an average Performance Score of 87.9 compared to the overall KLAS Medical Equipment Performance Score of 85.1 in KLAS’ 2007 Multi-Plate Computed Radiography (CR) System Study.

Healthcare Providers,
Want to see more reports?

Not a Provider, contact us for pricing details.

Today’s report is an update and continuation of the research published in the June 2006 Computed and Digital Radiography Perception Study. At the request of providers and vendors, KLAS did a Multi-Plate Computed Radiography (CR) System Study to explore the performance of the multi-plate CR modality and related vendors, explore the balance of CR and Digital Radiography (DR) offerings in an imaging portfolio, understand options for primary and backup machines for redundancy, and overview critical success factors for successful selection and implementation of CR systems.

Providers who contributed to this research have selected and implemented one or more CR units and enthusiastically gave their input regarding how it has impacted their clinical practice, administrative workflow, available functionality and overall imaging and reporting integration. Feedback from respondents will allow readers of this report to separate some of the hype from the simple realities of actual performance.

Main body vendors and products include:

  • Agfa CR 85-X
  • Carestream DirectView CR 975
  • Fuji ClearView-CS
  • Konica Xpress CR Dual Bay
  • Philips PCR Eleva Corado

 Download Report Brief  Download Full 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. © 2020 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.