Latin America PACS 2024
A Look at Vendor Performance in an Evolving Market

Fujifilm, Pixeon & AGFA HealthCare Perform Best Overall; Philips Most Used by Large Organizations

Fujifilm respondents across Latin America are mostly small-volume organizations (<300K studies annually) and report the highest overall satisfaction in this report. They frequently describe Synapse as reliable and easy to use. Pixeon is also used by mostly small-volume organizations, all of which are in Brazil. Regardless of imaging volume, satisfaction across respondents is comparable, and most report a strong vendor relationship. AGFA HealthCare has a large customer base outside of Brazil and performs well in this subregion. Also, they reentered the Brazilian PACS market in May 2023 (via a distributor), and initial customer feedback points to a strong vendor relationship. Across Latin America, AGFA is used by both small-volume organizations and large-volume organizations (≥300K studies annually). Philips’ respondents are located across Latin America and are primarily large-volume organizations. Though Image Management Vue PACS is seen as robust, there is ongoing frustration with the support and a lack of development, leading some customers to consider other options (see next section).

Customer Dissatisfaction with GE HealthCare, MV & Philips Leads Some to Consider Other Options

Brazil

Pixeon & Fujifilm Stand Out for Strong Support & Reliability

Pixeon respondents in Brazil report positive experiences, saying the vendor’s representatives and customer support staff are easy to work with, attentive, and often able to solve problems. In particular, the support team is highlighted for their responsiveness to working on integrations. Respondents also appreciate PACS Aurora’s reliability and usability. Some would like Pixeon to incorporate more customer feedback when developing the product’s road map. Most of Fujifilm’s respondents in Brazil appreciate that when they reach out, the support team is accessible, responsive, and quick. A few would like to see more proactive outreach. Initial feedback for AGFA HealthCare* is positive, with highlights including product reliability and value. Some respondents want more interaction with the reseller’s support and training teams.

*Limited data

Philips & MV Customers Frustrated with Pricing, Especially for Updates

Interviewed Philips customers say the PACS offers more robust functionality than competitors’ products. However, the support is a pain point, as customers struggle to get timely responses and effective solutions. Since Philips acquired Carestream in 2019, customer respondents have experienced slow, infrequent update cycles. A recent update has generated some optimism among respondents, though there are reports of bugs. Most interviewed customers perceive the ongoing costs as excessive, saying the expense sometimes prevents them from fully adopting updates with valuable functionality. Interviewed MV customers appreciate that the vendor’s support team is available and offers solutions whenever customers have questions. In contrast, communication around updates has negatively affected customer satisfaction. Some respondents aren’t aware of what features will be included in future updates; others feel MV either hasn’t delivered on promised functionality or hasn’t made new functionality accessible because of the cost. Also, increasing prices and an unclear pricing structure are reported concerns, and some customers are worried there would be additional costs if they were to switch to the new viewer. Dedalus has a small legacy customer base in Brazil; no customers in this subregion have been validated by KLAS as using the go-forward PACSonWeb product.

Other Latin American Countries & the Caribbean

AGFA HealthCare Highlighted for Support, Ease of Use & Reliability

AGFA HealthCare respondents in this subregion report high overall satisfaction, describing the product as robust, reliable, and user friendly. The vendor sells their product both directly and indirectly (depending on the country), and interviewed customers using resellers generally report an experience consistent with those who work directly with AGFA HealthCare. Generally, respondents also report a positive experience with the support and highlight the team’s accessibility, timeliness, and knowledge. AGFA HealthCare provides a local support team, which multiple customers appreciate. A few wish the local team had more knowledge, as the team has to escalate issues to the non-local support team more frequently than preferred. In Chile, there is mixed feedback on support—some appreciate the support while others report concerns with timelines and the team’s knowledge base. For Fujifilm* respondents, support and ease of use are strengths. The support—which in some countries is provided by resellers—is described as efficient and knowledgeable. A few Fujifilm respondents would like additional functionality specific to their needs. Interviewed Dedalus* customers (all of which process <50K studies annually) say the new offering in the region, PACSonWeb, is reliable and generally easy to use. Feedback on support is mixed—some mention the response time is quick, while others say it is slow.

*Limited data

Philips Customers Concerned with Slow Development; GE HealthCare Customers Frustrated with Support

Philips respondents report support issues, including knowledge gaps and slow responses. Some customers have been waiting for Philips to upgrade the product for a long time and are concerned about the vendor’s ability to adapt to organizations’ shifting needs (e.g., greater scalability, a cloud offering). Some GE HealthCare respondents appreciate the vendor’s long history of offering a generally reliable product that has had minimal modifications. However, support is a frustration, particularly the timeliness of responses and ability to provide effective solutions. Many respondents say the support is provided by non-local resources, and the different time zones and support’s lack of local knowledge contribute to the slowness. (Of note, the first tier of support is based in Brazil, and the three interviewed customers in Brazil report stronger support and higher overall satisfaction.) Additionally, interviewed customers in this subregion say GE HealthCare has fallen behind on delivering new functionality, leading them to believe the vendor is prioritizing customers in other parts of the world.

About This Report

Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT solutions and services their organizations use. For this report, interviews were conducted over the last 12 months using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare software, which is composed of 16 numeric ratings questions and 4 yes/no questions, all weighted equally. Combined, the ratings for these questions make up the overall performance score, which is measured on a 100-point scale. The questions are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.

Sample Sizes

Unless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique customer organizations interviewed for a given vendor or solution. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one customer organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. The following table shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each vendor or solution as well as the total number of individual respondents.

Some respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given vendor or solution can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses for a particular question is less than 6, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 3, no score is shown. Where textual content relies on limited data, the vendor name is marked with an asterisk. Note that when a vendor has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.