Premium Reports
UK PACS 2013

UK PACS 2013
The View Is Changing

| Read Time: 4 minutes

In the UK, many healthcare trusts are currently under regional contracts with a licensed service provider (LSP). These PACS contracts are starting to come up for renewal this summer and over the next couple of years, which means hundreds of millions of pounds in imaging IT business. Trusts and individual hospitals are taking a serious look at their options. Clinicians and IT professionals wonder about the track record of and new entrants to the UK PACS market. Which suppliers are best positioned to pick up new business in the UK? KLAS spoke with 93 providers from the UK to find out.

Vendor Performance


Key Findings

Carestream Has a Bright Future: The research suggests that Carestream is in a top position for net new PACS wins in England as well as potential for RIS and VNA business. The smaller live client base, which is all direct Carestream business, confirms early success and satisfaction with Carestream.

UK PACS Market Share Does Not Equate to Mindshare: The fact that providers are working through LSPs has created market share for Agfa and GE, but it has also negatively affected the perception of those suppliers. While GE is mentioned as the top choice in some deals, that is outweighed by the number of their customers who are leaning elsewhere in new tenders. While Agfa is set to retain more customers than GE, their performance, either direct or indirect, leaves room for improvement.

Acuo Tagged as Independent VNA Frontrunner: Many providers are looking to acquire a VNA, but only 6% of those interviewed in the study already have one in place. Twenty-three percent of providers said that Acuo is their first choice for VNA. Acuo has an advantage because they already have won several significant VNA tenders in the UK. While Acuo does not offer a PACS, they work with many of the PACS players in the UK. Alternatively, some organisations find their PACS supplier to be the most likely road to VNA, and Carestream, who has a full RIS/ PACS/VNA portfolio, is the first choice for 18% of providers.

Among LSP Participants, Sectra Customers Most Satisfied: Sectra garners higher marks from providers than Agfa and GE do, both when working through an LSP and when working directly with the supplier. While KLAS data does not show Sectra as a strong contender in new business, 9 out of 14 Sectra customers with plans to go to tender for PACS said Sectra is their first choice.

First Choice for PACS Supplier


How Vulnerable are the Three Original PACS Suppliers?

Providers report issues with service and lagging development as major reasons why they plan to replace their suppliers. Providers’ poor experiences with their LSPs have left a bad taste in their mouth, and GE, Agfa, and Sectra are going to lose customers due to this (even though customers dealing directly with these suppliers report a better experience).

GE appears to be the most vulnerable of the three — 18 of the 22 GE customers KLAS spoke to have gone or are planning to go to tender. Of those 18, only 4 said GE would be their first choice.

Agfa and Sectra are also vulnerable. Thirteen out of 20 Agfa clients and 14 out of 19 Sectra clients have gone or are planning to go to tender. Unlike GE, both Sectra and Agfa have more than 50% of their vulnerable sites considering their incumbent supplier as the favourite for those tenders.

Who Is Poised to Win?

Carestream has the most to gain and does not have any NHS contract vulnerability. They have significant mindshare among those looking for a PACS replacement due to their breadth of imaging offerings and success in the UK. While Fuji does not top the list as far as mindshare, they stand to gain as GE customers look for greener pastures.

Despite not having a national contract like Carestream and Fuji do, Philips, Cerner, Infinitt, Insignia, and NovaRad all were mentioned as a top choice for at least one provider in this research. Since completion of this study, Philips has announced a multiple-trust PACS win that may be a bellwether of things to come.

PACS Overall Performance Scores


Supplier Bottom Lines

Agfa HealthCare—A PACS market share leader in England. Broad imaging portfolio (PACS, RIS, VNA, and enterprise viewer) keeps them relevant in PACS deals. Poor delivery of service and support as well as lagging technology development and deployment have hurt reputation. Some are waiting for features and functions promised with v.6.5. In current tenders, only Agfa customers have chosen Agfa as their top choice.

Carestream—Likely to pick up a large number of new UK clients as one of the top-considered PACS and VNAs. Reputation for good technology and service. Current customers say it is easy to use with an intuitive user interface. Good service but could be made better with more available engineers.

FUJIFILM—Small footprint in UK but won a national seven-year contract for Wales in 2012. Great support and intuitive system. Implementations and phone support much better than the competition. Some reports of staffing issues resulting from the rollout in Wales. Fuji has less mindshare than most major UK PACS players but stands to gain new customers.

GE Healthcare—Large PACS footprint in England. Mindshare lacking for new PACS deals in part due to negative LSP experience. High cost and lack of functionality create vulnerability. Lagging updates and feature development such as remote viewing.

Sectra—Relatively large share of customers in London and Northern Ireland. Somewhat vulnerable in coming PACS tenders. Working with the Sectra LSP, BT, is a struggle. Sectra direct customers are happiest in the study. Those on IDS7 are happier than those on older versions.

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.