Here is a straightforward comparison between Pract-Eze Dental and some of the other dental software products available. It is impossible to compare all features, so we only address some of the most popular features:
Dentrix
Pros: Dentrix has more premade reports, although you cannot customize them. It has a few more features in the Appointment Book for larger offices, such as view by month. Dentrix also has available an expensive integrated imaging module which can handle digital x-rays without having to switch to another program.
Cons: Dentrix uses the C-tree database system, a 20 year old flat-file system. This limits the programming flexibility, the custom reporting ability, and also limits the number of workstations to about 15 or 20. For larger clinics, Dentrix tries to upgrade users to DX-ONE, an SQL-based program which runs more than $20,000. The core of Dentrix has not been improved over the years. It is slow and difficult to use because of the many small windows and popup controls.
A recent trend in Dentrix is an increased pressure to use their 'integrated' products. They purposely try to lock you out of using other e-claims clearinghouses, they discontinued support for the Schick bridge for digital x-rays, and they discontinued the bridge to Care Credit. They do not care about bridging to other software, and they generally make life miserable for you if you try to use anything other than a Dentrix product. Images and documents are all stored in a proprietary format, so you don't have access to them unless you export them.
The ledger in Dentrix is not layed out well, and the accounting functions are substandard. You can not mix insurance information between families, making divorce situations very messy and difficult. Accounts are tracked by family and you cannot split payments between family members. When a patient calls it is very difficult to tell them where their balance came from and it is very frustrating.
Dentrix is not responsive to the needs and requests of their users.
PracticeWorks
Pros: Runs on a modern SQL database. Has specialized ortho and OMS versions which account for a large percentage of the user base. Recently bought by Kodak, so there have been some improvements in imaging features.
PW has a lot of automation features built in. For those who like to run macros, PW has a variety of tools available. They allow but do not encourage 3rd party linking to the database. PW is geared towards smaller offices, and they recommend using SoftDent in larger offices.
Cons: Practiceworks has led the recent industry trend of buying out smaller dental software companies and forcing the users to switch to PW if they want continued support. Many users are obviously not happy with this. Also, you are fairly locked in to their e-claims clearinghouse, limiting your choices. You are limited to 3 fee schedules, and even though you can use the blue book to get accurate estimates for other insurance companies, you can still only enter 3 fee schedules. Pract-Eze Dental, needless to say, has unlimited fee schedules. The PW user interface is becoming outdated.
SoftDent
Pros: Mature with lots of features to handle almost any situation. Bought by Practiceworks which was then bought by Kodak. Lots of reports available. Suited for very large offices, and even multilocation offices. Users seem to be very happy with the front office capabilities. The most recent version has new features that were originally in PracticeWorks.
Cons: As with Dentrix, Softdent uses the outdated C-tree database. This limits the flexibility of the program and of custom reports. The windows are small, limiting the amount of information that can be viewed. Local distributers of Softdent have also been eliminated, causing resentment in the dental community, and affecting local support options. The clinical charting is not as comprehensive as the front office functions.
Eaglesoft
Pros: Good control over multiple treatment plans. Generally positive responses from users who appreciate the features and the good service. They continue to make useful improvements.