Premium Reports
Contact KLAS
 Download Full Report    Zoom in charts

Preferences

   Bookmark

Related Series

Radiation Therapy 2019
|
2019
Radiation Therapy 2017
|
2017
Radiation Therapy 2014
|
2014
Radiation Therapy 2013
|
2013
Radiation Therapy 2011
|
2011
Radiation Delivery 2010
|
2010

 End chart zoom
Radiation Therapy Product Comparison Report 2014 Radiation Therapy Product Comparison Report 2014
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

Radiation Therapy Product Comparison Report 2014

June 15, 2014 | Read Time: 2  minutes

Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 5/29/2022 2:07:31 AM and Model.reportId = 1006

BOTTOM LINES Radiation Therapy 2013: Striving for Accuracy and Upgradeability

HtmlReportContent Current Time Inside Cache Tag Helper: 5/29/2022 2:07:31 AM and Model.reportId= 1006 and Model.HtmlReportContent_LastWriteTimeUtcInTicks=637720873462797745

ELEKTA 

Providers enjoy working with Elekta. Pro - active support structure aids consistently excellent uptime with Infinity and Perfex - ion. Relatively small install base in North America. ELEKTA 

Perfexion: Offers speedy, incred - ibly precise treatment. Highest rated for beam accuracy. Best field support and leader in upgradeability. Limited use to treating brain is benefit and challenge. Treats much smaller patient volume than linear accelerator. Needs large population base to draw from to support it, but users consider it the best treatment for specific brain cancers. 

ELEKTA Infinity: Easy to use and functional due to automation, but slow to grow market share. Good upgradeability. Proactive support leads to excellent inter - action with Elekta. Lowest rated for beam accuracy and IGRT. 

ELEKTA Agility: Elekta’s new offering to compete head-to-head with TrueBeam. Starting out strong, though only a small sample reporting. Early adopters doing wide variety of treatments, both SRS and SBRT. So far customers are pleased. Many Infinity customers desire the MLC upgrade to Agility. 

ELEKTA Synergy: Elekta’s base model linear accelerator. Lower price point and upgradeability to Infinity. VARIAN Market share leader. Improving respon - siveness. Frustrations working with Varian less pronounced than in previous years. Clinac iX and Trilogy customers report continuing contracting problems due to inflexibility. 


VARIAN 

TrueBeam: Account manage - ment for TrueBeam much better than for Clinac iX or Trilogy. Technology leader with top-rated IGRT, beam accuracy well received, and high adoption of SRS and SBRT. Some experience downtime and lack of proactive service. 

VARIAN Clinac iX: Better uptime on aver - age than TrueBeam or Trilogy, but less SRS and SBRT users than TrueBeam or Trilogy. Solid linear accelerator used for basic treatments. 

VARIAN Trilogy: Offers providers a wide range of treatments for patients using RapidArc. Only 81% would buy again—be - low market average. Implementation and training struggles. 


ACCURAY 

Severe downtime issues for TomoTherapy and CyberKnife. Service contract pricing causing pain. Both systems described as incredibly accurate and precise. 

ACCURAY CyberKnife: Product meets or exceeds providers’ expectations. Contract - ing, account management, and upgrade - ability are areas to improve. Lauded for developing new technology, but expensive. Despite issues, 95% would buy again. 

ACCURAY TomoTherapy: Most continue to be pleased with field support though a few say it has gone downhill since Accuray took over. Reliability issues still plague many customers. Lack of integration, or cost to build an interface, is painful. Only 86% would buy again, which is below average.

 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. © 2022 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.