Thank you !

Access info about PACS on your dashboard or bookmark under

(Your Products / Your Organization's Products)

We are currently researching PACS.

Will you help us?

Take A Survey

Premium Reports
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report    Zoom in charts

Preferences

   Bookmark

Related Series

PACS 2020
|
2020
PACS 2018
|
2018
PACS 2017
|
2017
PACS Technology 2013
|
2013
Community and Ambulatory PACS 2012
|
2012
PACS 2011
|
2011
Ambulatory RIS/PACS
|
2011
A Read on PACS
|
2010
The New PACS Market
|
2009
Ambulatory PACS 2008
|
2008
Community Hospital PACS 2008
|
2008
PACS - Acute Care 2008
|
2008
Ambulatory PACS 2007
|
2007
Community Hospital PACS 2007
|
2007
Ambulatory PACS 2006
|
2006
Community PACS 2006
|
2006
Acute Care PACS 2006
|
2006
PACS - Ambulatory/Imaging Center Report 2005
|
2005
PACS - Community Hospital Report 2005
|
2005
PACS - Acute Care Large Study 2005
|
2005

Related Segments

Related Products

Related Vendors

 End chart zoom
PACS 2015 PACS 2015
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

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

author - Aaron Gleave
Author
Aaron Gleave
author - Emily Paxman
Author
Emily Paxman
 
February 25, 2015 | Read Time: 2  minutes

Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 10/20/2021 1:31:02 PM and Model.reportId = 1010

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.

Thank you !

Access info about PACS on your dashboard or bookmark under

(Your Products / Your Organization's Products)

We are currently researching PACS.

Will you help us?

Take A Survey

HtmlReportContent Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 10/20/2021 1:31:02 PM and Model.reportId= 1010 and Model.HtmlReportContent_LastWriteTimeUtcInTicks=637499789377466341

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.

top performers

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.

performance review

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.

vendor stability

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.

top five reasons vendors are being considered

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.

 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. © 2021 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.