Our analysts compared simplepractice vs Luma Health based on data from our 400+ point analysis of Patient Scheduling Software, user reviews and our own crowdsourced data from our free software selection platform.
Analyst Rating
User Sentiment
among all Patient Scheduling Software
simplepractice has a 'excellent' User Satisfaction Rating of 92% when considering 5040 user reviews from 4 recognized software review sites.
Luma Health has a 'excellent' User Satisfaction Rating of 94% when considering 102 user reviews from 2 recognized software review sites.
SelectHub research analysts have evaluated simplepractice and concluded it earns best-in-class honors for Mobile Capabilities. simplepractice stands above the rest by achieving an ‘Excellent’ rating as a User Favorite.
Luma Health stands above the rest by achieving an ‘Excellent’ rating as a User Favorite.
SimplePractice features a user-friendly interface and a complete set of tools for managing day-to-day medical operations. It offers advanced features such as HIPAA-compliant telehealth, a robust customer portal and a wide range of planning and notes options such as Wiley Planners, pre-built templates and a customized form-creation tool. Like many software solutions, there is a learning curve to master the features provided. Customer support is friendly and responsive. Many, however, wished it offered immediate phone support for a more streamlined workflow. Reviewers noted that it offers limited customization and would like the ability to add multiple people to video sessions.
Luma Health paints a mixed picture in user reviews. Praised for its streamlined communication, empowered patients, and workflow efficiency, it faces criticism for limited customization, occasional glitches, and higher price tags. "Luma transformed our patient engagement," one user raves. "Appointment reminders cut no-shows in half, and patients love the secure messaging and online bill pay." Others echo this sentiment, highlighting Luma's "intuitive interface" and "patient-centric approach" compared to "clunky alternatives." However, some users find Luma less flexible. "Customization options are limited," one reviewer complains. "I wish I could personalize certain features to better fit our practice's workflow." Others mention occasional technical hiccups, calling them "frustrating workflow disruptions." Cost also emerges as a concern. "Compared to other patient engagement platforms, Luma can be expensive, especially for smaller practices," one user notes. This price point, coupled with the onboarding effort required to get patients actively using the platform, can be a hurdle for some. Overall, Luma Health shines in its ease of use and patient-centric features, but its customization limitations, technical glitches, and higher price tag might deter some users. Ultimately, the decision seems to hinge on individual practice needs and budget constraints. As one user aptly summarizes, "Luma is a powerful tool, but it's not a one-size-fits-all solution."
WE DISTILL IT INTO REAL REQUIREMENTS, COMPARISON REPORTS, PRICE GUIDES and more...