Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Medical Procedures

Name: Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Medical Procedures
Brand: Wolters Kluwer
Rating: 4.5 (1 reviews)

Lippincott Medical Procedures is a digital procedural training solution that delivers step-by-step video instruction and supporting learning materials for core hospital and ambulatory procedures and provides standardized modules and usage tracking for institutional education workflows.

Est 1836|Valuation $19.4B|Raised $840K|23 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 357K|Website|Web traffic 3.0M|FTEs 21,000|HQ Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands

MarketsLearning Management System (LMS)

Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Medical Procedures screenshot

01Competitive Landscape

| Aspect | Lippincott Medical Procedures | Elsevier ClinicalKey (Procedure Videos) | NEJM (Videos in Clinical Medicine) | |--------|---------------|----------------|----------------| | Starting Price | Not publicly listed (quote-based institutional) | Not publicly listed for institutional packages; consumer store pages vary by specialty package | Transparent individual subscription pricing published by the vendor | | Recommended for | GME programs seeking a focused, standardized procedural curriculum of core procedures with multimedia modules | Institutions seeking procedure videos integrated with a broad clinical reference (books/journals/guidelines/tools) | Clinicians and students seeking journal-affiliated multimedia and CME with procedural videos as part of a subscription | | Noted strength | Structured module approach for core procedures; standardized format; designed for trainee education | Breadth: integrates procedure videos with many other clinical reference modalities | Established editorial reputation for clinical content; individual subscription option available | | Noted weakness | Limited public independent review evidence; unclear enterprise security feature documentation; scope appears limited (modest curated set of core procedures) | Can be broader than needed if only procedures are required; potential content or interface complexity for trainees | Not designed as a structured residency curriculum tool; limited tracking/reporting for programs | - Direct competitors and their key differentiators - Elsevier ClinicalKey: differentiates by being a broad clinical reference platform with procedure videos as one content type. - NEJM: differentiates by journal authority and multimedia offerings with CME; it is not primarily a skills curriculum platform. - Feature comparison: where this product appears stronger vs weaker - Appears stronger - Structured procedural modules and standardization for core procedures - Curated set of core procedures (more modest than very large libraries) - Appears weaker - Breadth of coverage beyond core procedures compared with large reference platforms - Public transparency around enterprise features and product-scoped security/compliance documentation - Pricing comparison: value proposition vs alternatives - NEJM provides transparent individual pricing, whereas Lippincott Medical Procedures appears institution/quote-based. - ClinicalKey is typically institution-licensed with non-public pricing, similar to Wolters Kluwer institutional offerings. - Customer testimonials comparing this product to competitors - Vendor testimonials often contrast the product with unvetted online video sources rather than named paid competitors. - Community discussions about procedure video sources reference platforms such as ClinicalKey and Touch Surgery; Lippincott Medical Procedures is less frequently mentioned in those threads. - Market share and adoption trends - Not enough public data found to quantify adoption of Lippincott Medical Procedures specifically. - Adjacent product lines (e.g., Lippincott Procedures for nursing) appear deployed in multiple health systems based on institutional pages and press releases, but that cannot be directly mapped to Medical Procedures. - When customers choose competitors instead (and why) - Choose ClinicalKey when: - The institution prefers an integrated reference platform (books/journals/guidelines/calculators/procedure videos) rather than a procedural-only curriculum. - Choose NEJM when: - Individuals want a self-serve subscription that includes multimedia and CME with transparent pricing. - Choose Touch Surgery or free video sources when: - Trainees need free or low-cost quick primers and acceptance of variable quality and evidence basis is acceptable.

01Competitive Landscape

Aspect	Lippincott Medical Procedures	Elsevier ClinicalKey (Procedure Videos)	NEJM (Videos in Clinical Medicine)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed (quote-based institutional)	Not publicly listed for institutional packages; consumer store pages vary by specialty package	Transparent individual subscription pricing published by the vendor
Recommended for	GME programs seeking a focused, standardized procedural curriculum of core procedures with multimedia modules	Institutions seeking procedure videos integrated with a broad clinical reference (books/journals/guidelines/tools)	Clinicians and students seeking journal-affiliated multimedia and CME with procedural videos as part of a subscription
Noted strength	Structured module approach for core procedures; standardized format; designed for trainee education	Breadth: integrates procedure videos with many other clinical reference modalities	Established editorial reputation for clinical content; individual subscription option available
Noted weakness	Limited public independent review evidence; unclear enterprise security feature documentation; scope appears limited (modest curated set of core procedures)	Can be broader than needed if only procedures are required; potential content or interface complexity for trainees	Not designed as a structured residency curriculum tool; limited tracking/reporting for programs

Direct competitors and their key differentiators
- Elsevier ClinicalKey: differentiates by being a broad clinical reference platform with procedure videos as one content type.
- NEJM: differentiates by journal authority and multimedia offerings with CME; it is not primarily a skills curriculum platform.
Feature comparison: where this product appears stronger vs weaker
- Appears stronger
  - Structured procedural modules and standardization for core procedures
  - Curated set of core procedures (more modest than very large libraries)
- Appears weaker
  - Breadth of coverage beyond core procedures compared with large reference platforms
  - Public transparency around enterprise features and product-scoped security/compliance documentation
Pricing comparison: value proposition vs alternatives
- NEJM provides transparent individual pricing, whereas Lippincott Medical Procedures appears institution/quote-based.
- ClinicalKey is typically institution-licensed with non-public pricing, similar to Wolters Kluwer institutional offerings.
Customer testimonials comparing this product to competitors
- Vendor testimonials often contrast the product with unvetted online video sources rather than named paid competitors.
- Community discussions about procedure video sources reference platforms such as ClinicalKey and Touch Surgery; Lippincott Medical Procedures is less frequently mentioned in those threads.
Market share and adoption trends
- Not enough public data found to quantify adoption of Lippincott Medical Procedures specifically.
- Adjacent product lines (e.g., Lippincott Procedures for nursing) appear deployed in multiple health systems based on institutional pages and press releases, but that cannot be directly mapped to Medical Procedures.
When customers choose competitors instead (and why)
- Choose ClinicalKey when:
  - The institution prefers an integrated reference platform (books/journals/guidelines/calculators/procedure videos) rather than a procedural-only curriculum.
- Choose NEJM when:
  - Individuals want a self-serve subscription that includes multimedia and CME with transparent pricing.
- Choose Touch Surgery or free video sources when:
  - Trainees need free or low-cost quick primers and acceptance of variable quality and evidence basis is acceptable.

Aspect

Lippincott Medical Procedures

Elsevier ClinicalKey (Procedure Videos)

NEJM (Videos in Clinical Medicine)

Starting Price

Not publicly listed (quote-based institutional)

Not publicly listed for institutional packages; consumer store pages vary by specialty package

Transparent individual subscription pricing published by the vendor

Recommended for

GME programs seeking a focused, standardized procedural curriculum of core procedures with multimedia modules

Institutions seeking procedure videos integrated with a broad clinical reference (books/journals/guidelines/tools)

Clinicians and students seeking journal-affiliated multimedia and CME with procedural videos as part of a subscription

Noted strength

Structured module approach for core procedures; standardized format; designed for trainee education

Breadth: integrates procedure videos with many other clinical reference modalities

Established editorial reputation for clinical content; individual subscription option available

Noted weakness

Limited public independent review evidence; unclear enterprise security feature documentation; scope appears limited (modest curated set of core procedures)

Can be broader than needed if only procedures are required; potential content or interface complexity for trainees

Not designed as a structured residency curriculum tool; limited tracking/reporting for programs