Columbia, MD (PRWEB) September 14, 2017
U.S. hospitals are mostly satisfied by the service they receive from their OEM diagnostic imaging equipment suppliers, with 72% reporting that they are highly satisfied. But satisfaction can vary widely based on imaging modality, and satisfaction levels in some modalities have actually fallen since last year, according to results from a series of newly released ServiceTrak™ reports from market research firm IMV.
Hospitals continue to rely heavily on the manufacturers of their diagnostic imaging equipment for service. In 2017, about 70% of all dollars spent by hospitals on service for imaging equipment were spent with the manufacturers of that equipment.1
The new ServiceTrak results indicate that overall satisfaction at hospitals with this service has remained unchanged since the first half of 2016, with about 72% of respondents reporting that they are highly satisfied with the service from their OEM.
But a deeper dive into ServiceTrak data by modality indicates that the changes in satisfaction with overall OEM service vary. The report shows that industry-wide, MRI and general x-ray are the only modalities showing an increase in overall satisfaction compared with a year ago, while CT, general ultrasound, and mammography show decreases when compared with overall satisfaction in early 2016.
The report also investigates by imaging modality the key drivers for four categories of customer satisfaction. IMV’s statistical model determines the drivers of satisfaction in the following categories:
1. Overall manufacturer performance
2. Overall service performance
3. Overall system performance
4. Probability of repurchase
According to the report, technology leadership is one of the most important key drivers for probability of repurchase, irrespective of modality. Looking at the individual modalities, the other drivers influencing probability of repurchase vary. For general x-ray, the second most important driver is system ease of use, while hardware reliability is the second leading driver for PET.
“The key driver analysis is useful in helping manufacturers target the areas critical to creating satisfied customers who will continue to purchase their products,” notes Scott Lamb, senior project manager, ServiceTrak.
Of the major imaging system manufacturers, here are a few examples of their top ratings, based on the percentage of highly satisfied users:
GE: Overall Manufacturer Performance in R/F
Hitachi: Competence of Field Service Engineer in MRI
Hologic: Overall Service Performance in Mammography
Philips: Overall Service Performance in Echocardiography
Siemens: Overall Service Performance in CT
Toshiba: Overall Service Performance in MRI
The ServiceTrak report uses 37 attributes that are rated on a 10-point scale in which 10 equals “excellent” and 1 equals “very poor.” Ratings of 9 and 10 are considered highly satisfied, and the ServiceTrak reports provide a “% highly satisfied” score by manufacturer for each attribute.
IMV’s ServiceTrak reports for the first half of 2017 were published in July and August. Telephone interviews were conducted with radiology professionals representing more than 3,100 imaging systems for CT, MRI, nuclear medicine (SPECT), PET, general ultrasound, echocardiography, and x-ray systems (cath, angiography, mammography, general rad, and R/F).
Vendors covered in the ServiceTrak Imaging Reports include GE, Hitachi, Hologic, Philips, Siemens, and Toshiba. Separate reports are also provided for laboratory, radiation therapy, and patient monitoring.
About IMV Limited
IMV Limited is a marketing research and consulting firm founded in 1977, specializing in medical imaging, laboratory, and other advanced healthcare technology markets. IMV’s marketing research services, in combination with its databases of U.S. laboratory and imaging sites provide clients with valuable assistance in strategic planning, customer satisfaction, product development, and sales initiatives.
1 IMV, preliminary analysis for IMV 2017 Diagnostic Imaging Equipment Service Arrangements in U.S. Hospitals, internal communication, September 2017.