Interactive Patient Systems 2023
Who Is Leading the Way toward the Digital Patient Room of the Future?

Advanced Capabilities of Interative Patient Systems

Best in KLAS Winner pCare Leads with Broadest Adoption; Get Well Deeply Adopted and Seen as Complete, though Less Broadly Validated

pCare is the 2023 Best in KLAS winner for interactive patient systems, and their broad digital patient room capabilities drive high satisfaction for deep-adopting customers; notably, adoption is shallow across all capabilities due to their newness. Customers praise pCare for continually enhancing the system and being forward thinking, and most feel the vendor meets all expectations because they proactively communicate and help customers achieve important outcomes (e.g., increased HCAHPS scores, real-time patient feedback and service recovery). Get Well is more narrowly adopted and is validated deeply for multiple capabilities, leading measured vendors in adoption of digital whiteboards. Most respondents feel the solution is complete in terms of meeting digital patient room expectations, due in part to allowing them to proactively capture real-time information and provide on-the-spot service recovery. The majority of reported outcomes are centered on improved patient understanding and increased patient experience scores.

Strong Performer Vibe Health by eVideon Validated Broadly, Avidex Serves Narrower Customer Needs Well; Both Seen as Complete Solutions

Vibe Health by eVideon was broadly validated across all capabilities except BYOD integration and is viewed as a complete solution by two-thirds of respondents. Their patient feedback surveys are deeply adopted by customers with the goal of enabling real-time service recovery and improving patient satisfaction. Additionally, one respondent reports using RTLS integration to display staff members’ names and pictures when they enter the patient’s room; Vibe Health is the only vendor in this report with a customer mentioning this capability. Although user adoption of advanced capabilities is shallower, customers using Vibe Health are typically satisfied with their experience. Among interviewed Avidex customers, half feel the offering is complete and meets all expectations, highlighting outcomes such as nursing efficiencies, improved time management, fewer patient safety events, and decreased fall rates. Avidex has the fewest validated capabilities of any measured vendor, focused only on automated nonclinical service requests and patient feedback surveys. Some customers note opportunities for Avidex to communicate more about other capabilities; often respondents use an additional vendor’s solution for digital patient room capabilities.

Epic, SONIFI Health & Oneview Healthcare (Limited Data) Rarely Seen as Fully Complete Solutions Despite Broader Validations

Epic’s integrated system drives deep adoption of patient care coordination capabilities, and customers appreciate how these capabilities help patients have more transparency throughout their hospital journey and be more actively involved in their care. The system is also noted for improving patients’ and families’ understanding of the clinical experience. Some respondents have not seen any outcomes beyond patient education. The Epic offering falls short of customer expectations due to lacking nonclinical features (e.g., patient feedback surveys, room/environmental controls), which are major patient satisfiers. SONIFI Health’s capabilities are also broadly adopted by customers, who report the functionality drives strong patient experience scores. Additional customer-reported outcomes include streamlined education, a modern entertainment solution, and an improved discharge process (SONIFI is the only vendor with this reported outcome). Most respondents feel the solution is mostly or fully complete; however, those who feel the product doesn’t fully meet their expectations as a complete digital patient room offering cite technology limitations and poor product usability. Customers of Oneview Healthcare (limited data) have achieved increased HCAHPS scores and physician satisfaction by enabling patients to be in more control of their care. The digitization of service requests and meal ordering also reduces the burden on nurses, allowing them to focus on other clinical responsibilities. No respondents feel the product is fully complete and meets their expectations for digital patient room capabilities; some want more seamless entertainment options and note the ease of use for patients could be improved.

Overviews of Vendor Performance & Product Completeness

Vendors ordered alphabetically

About This Report

Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT solutions and services their organizations use. For this report, interviews were conducted over the last 12 months using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare software, which is composed of 16 numeric ratings questions and 4 yes/no questions, all weighted equally. Combined, the ratings for these questions make up the overall performance score, which is measured on a 100-point scale. The questions are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.

To supplement the customer satisfaction data gathered with the standard evaluation, KLAS created a supplemental evaluation to understand how deep adopter customers use their vendor’s interactive patient system. KLAS asked interviewed participants (1) what advanced capabilities they have adopted as part of their digital patient room, (2) how complete their vendor’s offering is regarding their expectations for the digital patient room, and (3) what outcomes they have achieved by adopting their vendor’s advanced capabilities. Data was collected from March 2022 to March 2023.

Sample Sizes

Unless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique customer organizations interviewed for a given vendor or solution. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one customer organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. The table below shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each vendor or solution as well as the total number of individual respondents.

Some respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given vendor or solution can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses for a particular question is less than 15, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 6, no score is shown. Note that when a vendor has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.