Compare Mend and eClinicalWorks - Feb 2023

Shlomi LaviShlomi Lavi / Feb 17, 2023

We publish unbiased reviews. Our opinions are our own and are not influenced by payments from advertisers. This content is reader-supported, which means if you leave your details with us we may earn a commission. Learn why ITQlick is free .

Bottom Line: Which is Better - Mend or eClinicalWorks?

eClinicalWorks is more expensive to implement (TCO) than Mend, and eClinicalWorks is rated higher (97/100) than Mend (76/100). eClinicalWorks offers users more features (8) than Mend (5).

Looking for the right Telemedicine solution for your business? Buyers are primarily concerned about the real total cost of implementation (TCO), the full list of features, vendor reliability, user reviews, and the pros and cons. In this article we compare between the two software products:

Mend Vs. eClinicalWorks

Mend: Mend is a fully integrated patient engagement and communications platform that increases patient volume, closes gaps in care, and automates workflow while enabling medical providers to increase revenue, reduce overhead, and save time. Mend enables patients and providers to connect via smartphones, tablets or computers through telemedicine while sim...

eClinicalWorks: eClinicalWorks is a privately-held, leader in ambulatory clinical solutions. Its technology extends the use of electronic health records beyond practice walls and creates community-wide records. The company has an established customer base of more than 80,000 physicians and 472,000 plus medical professionals across all 50 states with revenues for 2...

Who is more expensive? Mend or eClinicalWorks?

The real total cost of ownership (TCO) of Telemedicine software includes the software license, subscription fees, software training, customizations, hardware (if needed), maintenance and support and other related services. When calculating the TCO, it's important to add all of these ”hidden costs” as well. We prepared a TCO (Total Cost) calculator for Mend and eClinicalWorks.

Mend price starts at $49 per provider/month , On a scale between 1 to 10 Mend is rated 2, which is much lower than the average cost of Telemedicine software. eClinicalWorks price starts at $449 per provider/month + 2.9% of practice collections , When comparing eClinicalWorks to its competitors, the software is rated 4 - lower than the average Telemedicine software cost.

Bottom line: eClinicalWorks is more expensive than Mend.

Which software includes more/better features?

We've compared Mend Vs. eClinicalWorks based on some of the most important and required Telemedicine features.

Mend: Chat, Mobile Access, Project Collaboration, HIPAA Compliant, Patient portal.

eClinicalWorks: Appointment Management, Charting, E-Prescribing, E/M Coding, Handwriting Recognition.

Target customer size

Mend's typical customers include: Small, medium and large size businesses,

eClinicalWorks is a medical software solution that serves a wide range of healthcare providers, including hospitals, clinics, and private practices.

Mend

ITQlick rating
(4.2/5)

starts at $49 per provider/month

Mend software is a cloud-based Telemedicine and Digital Patient Intake system that allows patients and care providers to connect, share files, assessments, messages, photos and data. Care providers and the user...

Categories: Recurring invoicing, Video Conferencing, Residential Remodeling Estimating, Healthcare CRM.

eClinicalWorks

ITQlick rating
(3.4/5)

starts at $449 per provider/month + 2.9% of practice collections

eClinicalWorks is a practice management solution for healthcare providers. The solution offers a number of features that include a patient engagement tool that allows patients to engage better with their own he...

Categories: Medical, Allergy EMR, Cardiology EMR, CCHIT Certified EMR / EHR, Cloud Based EMR.

Compare specifications

Mend Specifications

ITQlick Score: 76/100
ITQlick Rating:
Pricing: 2/10 - low cost
Category: Telemedicine -> Mend review
Company: Mend
Pricing: starts at $49 per provider/month
Typical customers: Small, medium and large size businesses
Platforms: Desktop, Mobile, Cloud
Links: Mend review, Mend pricing, Mend alternatives

Compare features

Mend: 5 Features

Chat
Mobile Access
Project Collaboration
HIPAA Compliant
Patient portal

eClinicalWorks: 8 Features

Appointment Management
Charting
E-Prescribing
E/M Coding
Handwriting Recognition
HIPAA Compliant
Patient portal
Voice Recognition
ITQlick rating ITQlick Rating is based on the software score (below) and aggregated online reviews
ITQlick score ITQlick Score is a 1 to 100, the calculation is based on pricing, and functionality Vs. alternative solutions
Pricing score pricing Score is a 1 to 10 (10 is high cost), based on the TCO (cost of licences, customizations, training, hardware when relevant) Vs. alternative solutions
License pricing license pricing (if provided by the software vendor)
Functionality score
Software review
Compare
Mend
ITQlick rating
4.2/5
Score
76/100
Pricing
2/10
License pricing
$49 per provider/month
Functionality
31
Review
Compare
eClinicalWorks
ITQlick rating
3.4/5
Score
97/100
Pricing
5.2/10
License pricing
$449 per provider/month + 2.9% of practice collections
Functionality
41
Doxy.me ...
ITQlick rating
4.3/5
Score
89/100
Pricing
2.4/10
License pricing
$35 per provider/month
Functionality
10
Qualifac...
ITQlick rating
4.6/5
Score
86/100
Pricing
4.2/10
License pricing
$195 per month
Functionality
32
Updox
ITQlick rating
3.6/5
Score
85/100
Pricing
5.8/10
License pricing
$80 per provider/month
Functionality
3
Review

Auditor - Shlomi Lavi

Website Linkedin profile Facebook Twitter

Shlomi Lavi is an entrepreneur and founder of ITQlick.com. He holds a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) in Information Systems Engineering from Ben Gurion University in Israel. Shlomi brings 17 years of global IT and IS management experience as a consultant and implementation expert for small, medium and large-sized (global) companies. Shlomi’s goal is to share the best knowledge and news about information systems so you can make smarter buying decisions for your business.