Orthopaedic Department, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Cosham, Portsmouth PO6 3LY, UK
E-mail: grantshaw{at}doctors.org.uk
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| WHAT IS PACS? |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| The imaging journey |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Once the computer image has been seen in the clinical area it can be deleted from that workstation since a copy will have been permanently saved in the main archive. If the image is required for future clinics a new copy can be taken from the archive the night before it is required. This prefetching of anticipated images should allow access times of 2-10 seconds. If an image in the archive is required without noticee.g. for an accident and emergency (A&E) attendanceit could take 2-10 minutes to retrieve. Images from magnetic resonance, computed tomography (CT), ultrasound and nuclear medicine can also be saved in a PACS archive. PACS are hospital-wide computer systems used by most hospital specialists, among whom radiologists are important but not the only heavy users.
| CLINICAL BENEFITS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
For clinicians there are considerable benefits1 but the full potential will be realized only if the system is carefully tailored from the beginning of the procurement process. The most obvious benefits are that films are not lost (our A&E department has not lost an image in the past 18 months).
Because images can exist in different parts of the hospital at the same time, the houseman's battle with the X-ray department to release unreported films becomes a thing of the past. The images for each patient are catalogued and ordered in a searchable form. This makes it easier to find, for example, all the right knee images for a patient with rheumatoid arthritis whose X-ray packet is 4 cm thick. The potential to send compressed images to a consultant on call at home has intriguing implications. These reduced-quality images sent over a modem would still allow useful operation planning and guidance. In the future it may be possible to send the full-quality image when much faster modems/ADSL become available. With the same system it would be possible to enable GPs to dial into the hospital over a secure link to allow them direct access to certain images.
| CLINICAL CONCERNS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Reliability
PACS eliminates the loss or unavailability of images for individual
patients, but if the system was to fail it could cause a whole outpatient
clinic to be cancelled. System failure is unlikely to cause emergency
treatment to stop since each image reader can operate independent of the main
system, and can print directly to a printer, thus ensuring immediate access to
the image.
PACS archives and networks are just another large computer system as used in industry. Provided they are designed carefully with no single point of failure, and provided routine checking and housekeeping are maintained, there is no reason why they should be any less reliable than systems in banks, airports or defence. The danger in the National Health Service (NHS) is the nibbling cutback philosophy whereby a system is trimmed and then still expected to function at slightly reduced efficiency. These cutbacks are made by removing the duplication of expensive equipment. This lessens the reliability of the system from say 99.9% to 99%. This may sound acceptable until it is realized that 99% reliability means unplanned down-time of 90 hours a year. Clinics could not function with this low level of reliability. Defence systems demand 99.9% reliability (i.e. one day down in 3 years). Unfortunately, that last 0.9% requires doubling-up on expensive computer hardware.
A small number of key staff are also required if these systems are to function reliably. If the staff leave they have to be replaced immediately, not after a money-saving gap of 6 months, as so often happens in the NHS. There is at least one hospital in the NHS which has suffered as a direct consequence of missing key staff.
Speed of system
As computer speeds double every 18 months the computer technology becomes
less of an issue. At present a good PACS system should be able to deliver any
prefetched image to your screen within 2-10 seconds. This will seem an
irritatingly long delay as we become used to the systems but it is probably
quicker than the time taken to sort through an X-ray packet containing more
than 8 films.
Ease of use
All the PACS software available is intuitive and very easy to use at a
superficial level for anyone who is familiar with Microsoft Windows. The best
systems have the same customizable diagnostic software on all the workstations
in the hospital. All the workstations thus have the same look, feel, and
function, allowing the operator to choose which of the advanced searching and
display modes to use wherever they are in the hospital. Some PACS have several
levels of software comprising a powerful radiologist's diagnostic application
and an unrelated much simpler ward viewing program. This is a less desirable
solution since it lacks flexibility for clinicians who use the systems a great
deal. The software also looks and feels different in different areas of the
hospital, which is confusing.
Digitizing old films
Digitizers are available to archive existing traditional films; however,
with even the most automated process it is possible to archive only one film
each minute. Thus one must be highly selective in choosing which to
digitize.
Restricted image viewing
Traditional films are easily viewed almost anywhere and are highly
portable. Images in PACS can only be viewed on computer terminals. It is
therefore necessary to have a generous number of terminals around the hospital
to compensate. Some changes in work practices may be necessary, such as
examining all the films at the beginning of a ward round.
| HOW DOES IT WORK? |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In technical terms a typical high-quality chest X-ray image on our system has a file size of 20 MB, which can be compressed by lossless JPEG compression to about 8 MB. It is this 8 MB file that has to be transmitted around the hospital network and stored in the archive. A large (1000-bed) district general hospital will expect to store around 0.3 terabyte (300 gigabyte) of compressed image data each year. The systems that can store this volume of data are based on modern digital tape systems (DLT) or store the data on write-once CDs or magneto optical discs stored in a juke box. These storage systems are improving fast. For example, if these juke box systems move on to DVD, the storage capacity will increase 6-fold at a stroke. A very fast hospital network is required for transmitting these large amounts of data. Typically a central spine of Gig Bit Ethernet or similar is needed, but the local clinic areas can be served by the more familiar fast Ethernet. The workstations have to be fairly powerful PCs to cope with image manipulation, and this requires a large amount of RAM (256 MB would be typical). The screens for viewing the images should be large, flat, high-resolution and bright. A typical ward or clinic screen would be a 21-inch Trinitron colour monitor. For diagnostic work and reporting the requirement is for brighter (50 footLamberts) monochrome screens. Pairs of these screens are often set in portrait viewing position, working together as one.
Even with fast storage systems and fast networks some anticipation of the images is required. For instance, an orthopaedic fracture clinic in a large hospital (100 patients per clinic) requires about 1000 images to be immediately available. Not all of these will be viewed, but any delay in displaying the image will slow down a busy clinic. For this reason most PACS automatically receive a clinic list of all patients expected the night before. This allows all relevant images to be moved into a part of storage (raid) that allows much faster access (2-10 seconds). This prefetching is run at night when the system is not so heavily used. This type of organization also takes the strain off the main archive during the day, freeing it to cope with any unscheduled requests.
In theory, any file can be stored in a PACS archive. In practice only picture files are big enough to cause storage problems. Up to now the images in PACS systems have been mainly radiological; however, clinical photographs of all sorts could be stored in PACS archives. These could include medical photographs, images of histology slides for pathologists or retinal photographs for ophthalmologists.
It is possible to send full-quality images between hospitals over existing high-speed computer links. It is also possible to send selected slices from CT or MR over the Internet to clinicians at home or to GPs via standard modems. Plain radiological images, however, are very large files and standard modems are too slow at present to allow transmission in a reasonable time (30 minutes for a single chest X-ray over a conventional v90 modem). Reduced quality compressed images can be transmitted twenty times quicker and these can be perfectly satisfactory under some circumstances. For example, it is already possible for a registrar to send a compressed image to an orthopaedic consultant at home to allow useful discussion about treatment (a picture is worth a thousand words). ISDN lines can help but are not commonly available and are not fast enough to avoid some reduction in quality for practical transmission times. Over the next 2 years new data transmission systems such as ADSL and cable modems will solve the speed problems for those who have access to them.
| FUTURE DEVELOPMENT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To date this has not resulted in many difficulties because hardly any systems are being used throughout entire hospitals. Many suppliers claim they have achieved a filmless hospital; however, when further enquiries are made it usually transpires that the hospital still uses hard copies of images in most wards, clinics and theatres. As yet there are few systems available to be used in orthopaedic theatres, where there is the requirement for templating of prostheses on a radiographic image. This problem has now been recognized by some of the PACS suppliers and solutions are just emerging. However, special adaptations will only be supplied to the hospital if asked for, and that requires procurement input from non-radiology clinicians.
PACS forms an important part of the electronic patient record. However, a great deal of work is required to integrate PACS seamlessly with radiology information, order communications and then into an electronic patient record.
| A CLINICIAN'S GUIDE TO PACS PROCUREMENT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All the important decisions that govern how well a PACS will work in a clinic or theatre are made before the contract is signed, and they cannot easily be changed later. All PACS systems should be bought as a hospital-wide system, so the project team should include computer personnel and non-radiology clinicians as well as radiology staff. The inclusion of non-radiology clinicians in the project team will improve the chances of the system delivering a decent service to the wards, clinics and theatres.
If you are a clinician and rely on radiological images in your day-to-day work and hear that a PACS procurement is underway in your hospital, consider the following points:
| CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Z. Paskins and A. Rai The impact of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS) implementation in rheumatology Rheumatology, March 1, 2006; 45(3): 354 - 355. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||