Premium Reports
Contact KLAS
 Download Full Report    Zoom in charts



Related Series

Hybrid OR 2013
Interventional X-ray 2012
Interventional Labs 2011
Hybrid Labs Hit the Mark
Cardiovascular/Interventional Radiology X-ray 2008

 End chart zoom
CV/IR X-Ray Product Comparison Report 2014 CV/IR X-Ray Product Comparison Report 2014
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

CV/IR X-Ray Product Comparison Report 2014

June 15, 2014 | Read Time: 1  minute

BOTTOM LINES Hybrid OR 2013: Who is Setting the Pace for Innovation?


Highest-ranked hybrid OR vendor. Hybrid OR clients extremely happy, and overall performance higher than with traditional CV/IR customers. Hybrid OR customers received more focused attention during implementation and training, followed by excellent account management. Only 32% saw significant improvement in patient outcomes, the lowest of any vendor. Much lower than average. Early signs that Philips FlexMove customers are happy. Thirdparty lighting quality is lacking; integration a challenge. 


Hybrid OR market leader in tenure, market share, and technology. Users recognize the potential of the zeego. But poor training and implementations, exacerbated by the difficulty of the zeego, drive down overall satisfaction. Hybrid OR overall performance score lowest by a full 10 points. Providers praised phone support and field service—scores are average for those areas. 


Based on a small sample, training and implementations much better with hybrid OR customers than with conventional CV/ IR customers. Though available for 1.5 years, only validated one live customer using the new dedicated hybrid OR, Discovery IGS 730, at time of research. Five out of six said patient outcomes significantly improved. Clients want to add more procedure types but they don’t know what specifically. 


In early trending, hybrid OR performs extremely well. Overall performance eight points higher than their conventional offering, with huge differences in contracting and implementations. Three out of six reported no change in patient outcomes. Users doing fewest procedures per week and not much outside of traditional CV and IR procedures. 

*Preliminary data vendor

author - Robert Ellis
Project Manager
Robert Ellis
 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. © 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.