Premium Reports
PACS 2015

PACS 2015
Who Should Providers Look to For Long-Term Satisfaction?

Authored by: | Read Time: 2 minutes

PACS replacements are happening at all levels. Of the 852 providers KLAS spoke with, 22% plan to replace their vendor or would like to. KLAS specifically asked 68 providers who are in the selection process which vendors they are considering and why. This report discusses which PACS vendors are most vulnerable, who is considered most in purchases, what factors drive the selection process, and who delivers long-term satisfaction.

1. SECTRA, THE BEST KEPT SECRET

Sectra simply delivers, exceeding expectations for all facility sizes (from ambulatory clients to IDNs with over 2,000 beds). Clients experience deep functionality and solid service, and the system is easy to learn and use. Though the top performer, Sectra is seldom considered for new purchases due to weak brand recognition and a smaller U.S.presence in enterprise imaging.

2. FUJIFILM AND MCKESSON BEST AT SATISFYING LARGER ORGANIZATIONS

Both Fujifilm and McKesson deliver meaningful upgrades and high usability to their large customer bases, and both have demonstrated the ability to scale. Providers are confident in the vendors’ development strategies. Although Sectra and Carestream have smaller customer bases in the large space, both have found success thanks to consistent performance and, in the case of Carestream, customizability.

3. SIEMENS AND GE HEALTHCARE VULNERABLE TO REPLACEMENT

Siemens is likely to lose the most clients, with around 40% planning to leave and an additional 20% feeling stuck because of stagnant product development and poor QA around new releases. About 40% of GE Healthcare’s customers plan to leave, and an additional 14% feel stuck due to slow development, inconsistent support, and high costs. Conversely, Sectra, INFINITT, Intelerad, and Novarad have few dissatisfied customers thanks to consistent delivery of new functionality.

4. PHILIPS INCLUDED MOST IN NEW BUYING DECISIONS

Philips, GE Healthcare, Merge, and McKesson receive high consideration due to their large presence in imaging. Despite Philips’ mid-tier ratings for functionality and development, they experience widespread purchase consideration. While GE Healthcare stands to gain customers, potential gains may be offset by the number of customers planning to leave. Fujifilm is considered because oftheir strong usability. McKesson receives high consideration and rates high for functionality and development.

5. THE PACS PURCHASING PARADOX

Development is often touted by vendors as the driver in PACS deals. However, Sectra, DR Systems, INFINITT, and Novarad receive little consideration in potential deals despite leading in overall functionality and new development. On the other hand, the most considered vendors in replacement deals (Philips, Fujifilm, GE, and Merge) win largely because of their significant market share and imaging presence, yet rate lower for new development and overall functionality.

Want to see full details?

 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. © 2018 KLAS Enterprises, 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.