2017 Customer Attitudes and Adoption Plans of Digital Pathology Technologies

A Voice of Customer Study to Compare Trends Between Current and Potential Adopters of Digital Pathology Platforms

USD 4,950

* Required Fields

USD 4,950

PAY BY INVOICE

Be the first to review this product

A digital pathology end-user research was conducted to identify trends and developments in the field of digital pathology. The survey sought to collect the key information on usage and adoption and compare the perceptions of current and potential adopters of this technology.

For the survey, lab managers and pathologists of pathology facilities were invited to participate in an online survey conducted between June 2017 and July 2017. To qualify for survey participation, respondents had to be working in a private or public laboratory, clinical research institution, reference laboratory, academic medical center laboratory, hospital lab, or diagnostic company that employs digital pathology. Respondents had to be constant users or potential users of this technology.

Overall 154 responses were analyzed; more than 77% of the respondents were from the US and nearly 12% were from Europe. A large percent of users are currently using digital pathology tools for research, followed by digital pathology for teaching and education. However, for potential users, automated image analysis topped the list of encouraging areas. It was interesting to note that FDA clearance as a factor did not top the charts in the case of future user.

One of the key trends the survey reflected was the transition of digital pathology to cloud pathology, Cloud-based delivery of solutions has proven to decrease burden on IT staff, and is known to reduce installation time and to eliminate the need for costly IT infrastructure. These benefits can truly globalize digital pathology and promote telepathology to a large extent, for a field in which sharing and communication are vital. Nevertheless, Cloud is only a means to deliver the product; the solution must scale, supply a growing set of functionalities, operate with a central cloud infrastructure, and most importantly, provide a HIPAA-compliant and securely accessible environment.

Another key trend that emerged was the various criteria required by future adopters of digital pathology. Ease of operation and customer support and training surprisingly led in terms of importance (well ahead of price) during vendor selection; this was a similar trend for current users of digital pathology. Despite some similarities in responses between current and future users, there is significant insight that can be garnered with the differences found between these groups.

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary
Key Findings
2. Research Background, Objectives, Methodology
Research Objectives
Research Methodology
3. Respondent Demographics
Respondent Demographics
Strategic Imperatives for Contact Center Systems Providers (CCSPs)
4. General Usage and Topic Areas of Interest
Interest in the Usage of Digital Pathology
Use Case of Digital Pathology
Perception on FDA’s clearance on Digital Pathology Products
Topics of Interest to Current and Future Users
Perceptions on Cloud-Enabled Digital Pathology
Perception on Usage of Glass Vs Digital Image for Second Opinion and Consults
Uptake of Telepathology in 5 Years
5. Current User Trends—Pathology Facility Workload and Budgets
Case Load Analysis
Overall Lab Budgets for New Instrument Purchase & Annual Lab IT Spend on Storage of Scanned Images
6. Current User Trends—Digital Pathology Workflow Analysis
Methods of Recording Data Electronically
Technologies Currently Used
Image Storage
Image Format and Size
Monthly Storage and Network Requirement
Image Archiving and Image Compression
Licensing Model for Image Analysis
Frequently Outsourced Capabilities
7. Current User Trends—Vendor Perception from Current Users
Criterion for Vendor Selection
Brand Awareness—Scanners and APLIS
Brand Awareness—PACS and Image Archiving
8. Potential User Trends—Pathology Facility Workload and Budgets
Timeframe to Acquire New Solutions
Reasons for not Investing Earlier
Case Load Assessment
Annual Lab Budgets
9. Potential User Trends—Investment into Digital Pathology Workflow
Future Planned Investments
Image Storage Location
Monthly Storage Requirement and Image Format
Image Archiving and Image Compression
10. Potential User Trends—Future Adopter Vendor Perception
Criterion for Vendor Selection (Future Adopters)
Brand Awareness—Scanners and APLIS
Brand Awareness—PACS and Image Archiving
Top Innovative Companies in Digital Pathology Space
11. Perception of Molecular Pathologists vs. Histopathologists
Reasons for Not Investing—Molecular Pathology Vs. Histopathology
Use Cases Leading Adoption of Digital Pathology
Future Investment in Technology
APLIS Vendor Preference
12. The Last Word
Future Trends and Observations
Legal Disclaimer
13. Appendix
Additional Sources of Information
14. The Frost & Sullivan Story


List of Figures & Charts

1. Contact Center Systems Market: Market Drivers and Restraints, North America, 2017–2021


1. Digital Pathology Survey: Respondent Demographics, US, 2017
2. Digital Pathology Survey: Percent of Respondents by Facility Type, US, 2017
3. Digital Pathology Survey: Job Titles, US, 2017
4. Digital Pathology Survey: Pathology Related (IT) Job Titles, US, 2017
5. Digital Pathology Survey: Industry Experience, US, 2017
6. Digital Pathology Survey: Pathology Specialties, US, 2017
7. Digital Pathology Survey: Role in Decision Making Process, US, 2017
8. Digital Pathology Survey: Ownership Status of Digital Pathology Technologies, US, 2017
9. Digital Pathology Survey: Current User Interest, US, 2017
10. Digital Pathology Survey: Potential Adopter Interest, US, 2017
11. Digital Pathology Survey: Current User Interest, US, 2017
12. Digital Pathology Survey: Potential User Interest, US, 2017
13. Digital Pathology Survey: Current User and Potential Adopter Perception on FDA Clearance, US, 2017
14. Digital Pathology Survey: Current User Interest, US, 2017
15. Digital Pathology Survey: Potential User Interest, US, 2017
16. Digital Pathology Survey: Interest in Cloud-enabled Digital Pathology, US, 2017
17. Digital Pathology Survey: Usage of Digital Image Vs Glass, US, 2017
18. Digital Pathology Survey: Predictions on Telepathology, US, 2017
19. Digital Pathology Survey: Number of Slides Scanned, US, 2017
20. Digital Pathology Survey: New Equipment Purchase Budget, US, 2017
21. Digital Pathology Survey: Estimated Expense, US, 2017–2018
22. Digital Pathology Survey: Lab IT Spend on Storage of Scanned Images, US, 2017
23. Digital Pathology Survey: Electronic Reporting in Workflow, US, 2017
24. Digital Pathology Survey: Currently Used Technologies, US, 2017
25. Digital Pathology Survey: Image Storage Mode, US, 2017
26. Digital Pathology Survey: Digital Format, US, 2017
27. Digital Pathology Survey: Image Size, US, 2017
28. Digital Pathology Survey: Monthly Storage Requirement, US, 2017
29. Digital Pathology Survey: Network Requirement, US, 2017
30. Digital Pathology Survey: Need for Dedicated Image Archiving System, US, 2017
31. Digital Pathology Survey: Concerns with Image Compression, US, 2017
32. Digital Pathology Survey: Licensing Model for Image Analysis, US, 2017
33. Digital Pathology Survey: Criterion for Vendor Selection, US, 2017
34. Digital Pathology Survey: Majorly Used Scanners, US, 2017
35. Digital Pathology Survey: Majorly Used APLIS Vendors, US, 2017
36. Digital Pathology Survey: Companies with PACS Solution, US, 2017
37. Digital Pathology Survey: Companies with Image Archiving and Data Storage Solutions, US,2017
38. Digital Pathology Survey: Timeframe To Acquire New Solutions, US, 2017
39. Digital Pathology Survey: Reasons for not Investing in Digital Pathology, US, 2017
40. Digital Pathology Survey: Number of Slides Scanned, US, 2017
41. Digital Pathology Survey: Preferred Format of Slide Storage, US, 2017
42. Digital Pathology Survey: Annual Lab Budgets (Future Users), US, 2017
43. Digital Pathology Survey: Future Planned Investments, US, 2017
44. Digital Pathology Survey: Image Storage Location, US, 2017
45. Digital Pathology Survey: Monthly Storage Requirement, US, 2017
46. Digital Pathology Survey: Image Format Requirements, US, 2017
47. Digital Pathology Survey: Need for Dedicated Image Archiving System, US, 2017
48. Digital Pathology Survey: Concerns with Image Compression, US, 2017
49. Digital Pathology Survey: Criterion for Vendor Selection, US, 2017
50. Digital Pathology Survey: Future Preferred Scanner Brands, US, 2017
51. Digital Pathology Survey: Future Preferred APLIS Vendors, US, 2017
52. Digital Pathology Survey: PACS Provider Preference, US, 2017
53. Digital Pathology Survey: Preferred Vendor for Image Archiving and Storage, US, 2017
54. Digital Pathology Survey: Cloud Computing, US, 2017
55. Digital Pathology Survey: Top Provider of Machine Learning and AI, US, 2017
56. Digital Pathology Survey: Top Providers by Clinical Decision Support Tools, US, 2017
57. Digital Pathology Survey: Reasons for Lack of Adoption (Molecular Pathology vs. Histopathology Users), US, 2017
58. Digital Pathology Survey: Use Cases ( Molecular Pathology vs. Histopathology Users), US, 2017
59. Digital Pathology Survey: Future Technology Investment( Molecular vs Histopathology Users), US, 2017
60. Digital Pathology Survey: Vendor Preference (Molecular vs Histopathology Users), US, 2017



Keyword1

Keyword2

Keyword3

Related Research

Release Date : 15-Nov-16

Region : North America

Release Date : 12-Sep-16

Region : North America

Release Date : 07-Apr-2015

Region : North America

Why Frost & Sullivan

Working with the CEO’s growth team to create a vision based on a transformation growth strategy

Creating content-based digital marketing strategies that leverage our research perspective to differentiate and “tell your story”

Tracking over 1000 emerging technologies and analyzing the impact by industry and application to reveal the companies to watch in each sector

The Frost & Sullivan team is based in our 45 global offices and have developed a powerful global understandings of how industries operate on a global level.