The above comments will be a bit hit and miss because some of the systems are modular based thus the more you pay, the more is activated according to your need. The programmers are just wanting to re-coup the time that they have spent developing a module to the customer’s satisfaction and ultimate sign off! If your not paying for it, do you have a say in it?
In most circumstances the most basic level of package offered should fulfil the needs of an EBME department.
The pricing model for the companies is no doubt very different, a mixture of both initial capital outlay followed with recurring revenue charges.
This is further complicated by shifting revenue payments into capital and vice versa over the period of the contract to fit the bill. Overall though you will pay the same for the specific product for that contract period.
If I were evaluating fairly across the board at how much the actual product itself costs then I would look at a 10 year life cycle for all the systems taking into account.
* Basic product cost (Minus any hardware costs / software licensing fees for the server engine i.e. sql server or advantage server)
* Purchase cost
* Annual fees (minus any OPTIONAL extras) but including any term discounts.
Once you take the fees out for the sql server that the software developer has to pay, the charges for their wages, support, development you will find that they don’t really make a great deal of money until the volume of sales is high. Unlike medical equipment manufacturers!!
Try for example calling in a ‘Medical’ company to do x days bespoke data migration with a team of programmers to fit your needs and its understandable that they need to meet their costs.
Broadly speaking the cheapest recurring payment for systems I have heard of have been in the region of £3,500 ranging up to £23,000. Often the recurring price from the products like the devices we manage depends on the quality of support we rightly demand and receive from the company.
I would not personally be happy to purchase a "Boxed" product off the shelf as there will be so much to frustrate me that may make doing the job more complex.
If a product for example saves 1 hour or more of time per week in efficiencies through ease of use, automation, reporting, etc (which is not a massive ask between databases!) then technically with 20 staff this has saved 20 hours or ~£15k of real term time.
We manage millions of pounds worth of equipment, expenditure, capital replacement, record keeping etc etc an in real terms use a "Medical Grade" database designed specifically around our management functions.
I'm not closed about the fact that the system we use will never the cheapest system on the market, but I would argue that it is one of the most efficient when used and set up correctly and needs very minimal maintenance (if any). The dynamic development of the product is more important to me than receiving a standard boxed package.
I would hope that most people using a Medical device equipment management tool regardless of company or in-house wouldn’t fall into the trap of cutting cost corners at the loss of productivity.
Likely you won’t get firm prices from any of the companies due to the complexity of their pricing models and then you really wont be able to compare apples with apples as they say.
Perhaps a questionnaire about costs, development, functionality, automation, ease of use, implementation, support, audit trail may be more forthcoming for your study?