Ultrasound imaging on picture archiving and communication systems

Are radiologists satisfied?

Donald S. Emerson, Harris Cohen, Frank Parks, Jim Wan, Houston Graves

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives-To evaluate whether picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) adequately satisfy radiologists' needs in ultrasound (US) imaging and which PACS functions may be inadequately implemented for handling US diagnosis. Methods-An electronic survey was sent to the membership of the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound asking them to rate their PACS experience for different modalities, judge the quality of various PACS functions having an impact on US practice and diagnosis, indicate if they felt a need for US-related PACS functions to be implemented or improved, and rate PACS-related improvements for different components of their US practice. Results-Of the 161 respondents, 112 (70%) used a general radiology PACS. Of these respondents, only 53.2% gave a high rating to the US experience in PACS, significantly lower (P < .0001) than for computed tomography (85.2%), magnetic resonance imaging (84.4%), and radiography (83.2%). The functionality of US-specific display, imageprocessing, and data management PACS processes were graded significantly lower than basic PACS display functions. Only 0.9% of respondents highly rated PACS handling of 3-dimensional US volume data, whereas 92% highly rated the quality of the black-Andwhite US image display (P< .0001). Most respondents would like most of these US-specific functions implemented or improved, and most respondents stated that PACS has improved their US practice in different ways, although the contribution in more complex image analysis is lagging. Conclusions-Radiologists with a special interest in US believe that the PACS experience for US is lacking. This research helps identify those specific tasks that may further improve work efficiency and diagnostic confidence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1377-1384
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine
Volume32
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2013

Fingerprint

Radiology Information Systems
Ultrasonography
Radiologists
Data Display
Radiology
Radiography

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Ultrasound imaging on picture archiving and communication systems : Are radiologists satisfied? / Emerson, Donald S.; Cohen, Harris; Parks, Frank; Wan, Jim; Graves, Houston.

In: Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol. 32, No. 8, 01.08.2013, p. 1377-1384.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{abf696ae43ae4966b3d1f75ac52effe6,
title = "Ultrasound imaging on picture archiving and communication systems: Are radiologists satisfied?",
abstract = "Objectives-To evaluate whether picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) adequately satisfy radiologists' needs in ultrasound (US) imaging and which PACS functions may be inadequately implemented for handling US diagnosis. Methods-An electronic survey was sent to the membership of the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound asking them to rate their PACS experience for different modalities, judge the quality of various PACS functions having an impact on US practice and diagnosis, indicate if they felt a need for US-related PACS functions to be implemented or improved, and rate PACS-related improvements for different components of their US practice. Results-Of the 161 respondents, 112 (70{\%}) used a general radiology PACS. Of these respondents, only 53.2{\%} gave a high rating to the US experience in PACS, significantly lower (P < .0001) than for computed tomography (85.2{\%}), magnetic resonance imaging (84.4{\%}), and radiography (83.2{\%}). The functionality of US-specific display, imageprocessing, and data management PACS processes were graded significantly lower than basic PACS display functions. Only 0.9{\%} of respondents highly rated PACS handling of 3-dimensional US volume data, whereas 92{\%} highly rated the quality of the black-Andwhite US image display (P< .0001). Most respondents would like most of these US-specific functions implemented or improved, and most respondents stated that PACS has improved their US practice in different ways, although the contribution in more complex image analysis is lagging. Conclusions-Radiologists with a special interest in US believe that the PACS experience for US is lacking. This research helps identify those specific tasks that may further improve work efficiency and diagnostic confidence.",
author = "Emerson, {Donald S.} and Harris Cohen and Frank Parks and Jim Wan and Houston Graves",
year = "2013",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.7863/ultra.32.8.1377",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "1377--1384",
journal = "Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine",
issn = "0278-4297",
publisher = "American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ultrasound imaging on picture archiving and communication systems

T2 - Are radiologists satisfied?

AU - Emerson, Donald S.

AU - Cohen, Harris

AU - Parks, Frank

AU - Wan, Jim

AU - Graves, Houston

PY - 2013/8/1

Y1 - 2013/8/1

N2 - Objectives-To evaluate whether picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) adequately satisfy radiologists' needs in ultrasound (US) imaging and which PACS functions may be inadequately implemented for handling US diagnosis. Methods-An electronic survey was sent to the membership of the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound asking them to rate their PACS experience for different modalities, judge the quality of various PACS functions having an impact on US practice and diagnosis, indicate if they felt a need for US-related PACS functions to be implemented or improved, and rate PACS-related improvements for different components of their US practice. Results-Of the 161 respondents, 112 (70%) used a general radiology PACS. Of these respondents, only 53.2% gave a high rating to the US experience in PACS, significantly lower (P < .0001) than for computed tomography (85.2%), magnetic resonance imaging (84.4%), and radiography (83.2%). The functionality of US-specific display, imageprocessing, and data management PACS processes were graded significantly lower than basic PACS display functions. Only 0.9% of respondents highly rated PACS handling of 3-dimensional US volume data, whereas 92% highly rated the quality of the black-Andwhite US image display (P< .0001). Most respondents would like most of these US-specific functions implemented or improved, and most respondents stated that PACS has improved their US practice in different ways, although the contribution in more complex image analysis is lagging. Conclusions-Radiologists with a special interest in US believe that the PACS experience for US is lacking. This research helps identify those specific tasks that may further improve work efficiency and diagnostic confidence.

AB - Objectives-To evaluate whether picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) adequately satisfy radiologists' needs in ultrasound (US) imaging and which PACS functions may be inadequately implemented for handling US diagnosis. Methods-An electronic survey was sent to the membership of the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound asking them to rate their PACS experience for different modalities, judge the quality of various PACS functions having an impact on US practice and diagnosis, indicate if they felt a need for US-related PACS functions to be implemented or improved, and rate PACS-related improvements for different components of their US practice. Results-Of the 161 respondents, 112 (70%) used a general radiology PACS. Of these respondents, only 53.2% gave a high rating to the US experience in PACS, significantly lower (P < .0001) than for computed tomography (85.2%), magnetic resonance imaging (84.4%), and radiography (83.2%). The functionality of US-specific display, imageprocessing, and data management PACS processes were graded significantly lower than basic PACS display functions. Only 0.9% of respondents highly rated PACS handling of 3-dimensional US volume data, whereas 92% highly rated the quality of the black-Andwhite US image display (P< .0001). Most respondents would like most of these US-specific functions implemented or improved, and most respondents stated that PACS has improved their US practice in different ways, although the contribution in more complex image analysis is lagging. Conclusions-Radiologists with a special interest in US believe that the PACS experience for US is lacking. This research helps identify those specific tasks that may further improve work efficiency and diagnostic confidence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880864791&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880864791&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7863/ultra.32.8.1377

DO - 10.7863/ultra.32.8.1377

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 1377

EP - 1384

JO - Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

JF - Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

SN - 0278-4297

IS - 8

ER -