Step 1 of
Step 2 of
Step 3 of
Step 17 of
All Categories chevron icon Ambulatory & Post-Acute Care chevron icon Post-Acute Care Solutions chevron icon Hospice

MatrixCare Hospice

Subject Expert
Paul Hess
Research Director
KLAS Research Director - Paul Hess
 
Step 16 of
  Read User Comments
Step 15 of
 Compare Products
View Advanced Filters
Step 14 of

Trending Filters

By Years
1
2
3

Featured  Report

Hospice 2024: Faster Innovation Needed to Better Meet Unique Needs
Hospice 2024:
Faster Innovation Needed to Better Meet Unique Needs
October 2024
View Report

Preferences

Add Bookmark   Bookmark

Does this page look different?
Get a summary of what's new.
Get a tour.



Overall Score    Filtered view: ##.#   Segment Average ##.#

Average for Hospice ##.#
50
##.#
 
100
Software Average for KLAS Rated Products ##.#

Single Physician

The product does not have 15 surveys from facilities with 2-10 physicians, but has at least 15 when including surveys from single physician facilities.

Component

Solution that typically includes most but not all components that comprise a complete system or that serves only a subset of the market.

Limited market share

This solution does not have a sufficient number of live customers to qualify for a Best in KLAS ranking.

Not primary

Solution is not the vendor’s lead product in the category but may still be purchased.

Regional

Solution for which the majority of data comes from organizations located in the same, small geographical area.

Superseded

Legacy solutions or other solutions that are not generally marketed or whose marketing is superseded by another solution in the same category.

Emerging technology

Solution is new/emerging and has yet to meet standard data level qualifications. Designation will be removed once solution meets the qualifications.

Market Energy

This is an indication of the relative considerations of Market Energy within the shown products from the

Decision Insights KLAS Data

Market Energy Levels:

Low Market Energy
Medium Market Energy
High Market Energy
Not Enough Data

Org Sample Size

  • n = total survey sample size
  • u = # of unique organizations surveyed
Step 4 of
Step 5 of

Overall Score Trending (1 Year) Filtered view:

to see the full dataset.

If you don't have a login, getting started is easy.

Provider Organizations
Fill out our registration form to verify your organization.
HIT Companies
Contact a KLAS representative for plans and pricing.
Step 6 of

Latest Comments    See all (224) comments Filtered view: ##.#% ##.#% ##.#%  Download as Excel

Step 7 of
Step 8 of

Score Breakdown (1 Year)    Filtered view:

  Culture
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
 
Software avg. ##.#
Click for full details
Keeps ALL promises (Yes|No)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##%
 
Software avg. ##.#
Product works as promoted (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Proactive service (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
  Loyalty
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
 
Software avg. ##.#
Part of long-term plans (Yes|No)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##%
 
Software avg. ##.#
Would you buy again (Yes|No)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##%
 
Software avg. ##.#
Likely to recommend (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Overall satisfaction (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Forecasted overall satisfaction (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
  Operations
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
 
Software avg. ##.#
Quality of implementation (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Quality of training (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Ease of use (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
  Product
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
 
Software avg. ##.#
Supports integration goals (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Overall product quality (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Product has needed functionality (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Delivery of new technology (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
  Relationship
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
 
Software avg. ##.#
Quality of support (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Vendor executive involvement (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
  Value
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
 
Software avg. ##.#
Avoids charging for every little thing (Yes|No)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##%
 
Software avg. ##.#
Drives Tangible Outcomes (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Money’s worth (1-9)
Segment avg. ##.#
Segment avg. ##.#
##.#
 
Software avg. ##.#
Step 9 of
Step 10 of
Step 11 of
Score Distribution
 
 
 Mean
9
##.#%
8
##.#%
7
##.#%
6
##.#%
5
##.#%
4
##.#%
3
##.#%
2
##.#%
1
##.#%
Facility Type
 
 
Standalone Facilities
Multi-site Facilities
86%
14%

Step 12 of
Step 13 of
 Download as Excel  Print / Save as PDF
View All Reports
Related Reports
Perception
KLAS article icon
Transitions of Care 2022
29 December 22    |   Bradley Hunter and Paul Warburton
Inefficient care transitions lead to wasted time and energy, increased risk of human error, and potentially poor experiences for both patients and providers. Despite the industry’s attempts to ensure the right information is sent to the right people at the right time, healthcare organizations must often revert to manual processes for data entry, verification, and communication. Some organizations use or want to use technology to streamline their transitions of care (TOC). This report—KLAS’ first to look at TOC—draws from the perspectives of 95 healthcare leaders across multiple care settings to understand their adoption of care transition technology, the challenges they encounter in their care settings, and the vendors they are considering.
Perception
KLAS article icon
Home-Based Post–Acute Care 2022
10 November 22    |   Cimone Smith and Paul Hess
The homecare market has surged as healthcare organizations have sought to maintain quality patient care throughout the pandemic and fulfill requirements for value-based reimbursement. Organizations are looking to expand their homecare offerings; however, the pandemic has exacerbated staffing shortages and decreased bandwidth, making operations—let alone growth—difficult. To help organizations understand how peers are approaching the current environment, KLAS interviewed 88 leaders from home-based care organizations regarding the top challenges they face and the technology vendors they use or have considered investing in to address these challenges.
Performance
KLAS article icon
Post–Acute Care EMR Product Suites 2022
30 August 22    |   Paul Hess and Paul Warburton
Most providers in post–acute care settings want technology built for their specific area, but they face challenges with interoperability, analytics, value-based reimbursements, and care coordination. Increasingly, organizations are looking for vendors that can meet all their post–acute care needs. Several vendors are answering the call, despite the highly varied, unique challenges associated with each care setting. This report examines what solutions are offered, how they are being adopted, and how well they meet setting-specific functionality needs (particularly for home health and LTC/SNF). The report mainly focuses on vendors specific to post–acute care but also provides a brief look at the post–acute care solutions of enterprise acute care EMR vendors.
,
We use cookies! We use essential and basic aggregated, depersonalized Google Analytics cookies to provide the type of content which our visitors are most interested in.  Cookie Policy    
​