Skip to main content
Journal of Digital Imaging logoLink to Journal of Digital Imaging
. 1998 Aug;11(Suppl 1):149–150. doi: 10.1007/BF03168288

Impact of filmless imaging on the frequency of clinician review of radiology images

Bruce I Reiner 1,2,3,, Eliot L Siegel 1,2,3, Frank Hooper 1,2,3, Zenon Protopapas 1,2,3
PMCID: PMC3453391  PMID: 9735455

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of filmless imaging on the frequency with which physicians access radiology images and to assess clinician perception of image accessibility using a hospital-wide Picture Archival and Communication System (PACS). Quantitative data were collected at the Baltimore VA Medical Center (BVAMC), prior to and after conversion to filmless imaging, to determine the frequency with which clinicians access radiology images. Survey data were also collected to assess physician preferences of image accessibility, time management, and overall patient care when comparing filmless and film-based modes of operation. In general, there was a significant increase in the average number of radiology images reviewed by clinicians throughout the hospital. However, the one area in the hospital where this trend was not observed was in the intensive care unit (ICU), where the frequency of image access was similar between film and filmless operations. Ninety-eight percent of clinicians surveyed reported improved accessibility of images in a filmless environment resulting in improved time management. The mean clinician estimate of time saved due to the use of PACS was 44 minutes. The study documented a combination of clinician perception of improved accessibility and substantial time savings with the use of a hospital-wide PACS, which was supported by objective measurements. The increased frequency of image review by clinicians and rapid image access should provide a further impetus to radiologists to decrease report turnaround time to provide “added value” for patient care.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (379.1 KB).

References

  • 1.Siegel EL, Diaconis JN, Pomerantz S, et al. Making filmless radiology work. J Digit Imag. 1995;8:151–155. doi: 10.1007/BF03168713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Choplin RH, Boehme JM, Maynard CD. PACS: An Overview. RadioGraphics. 1992;12:127–129. doi: 10.1148/radiographics.12.1.1734458. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Warburton RN. Evaluation of PACS-Induced organization change. Int J Biomed Comput. 1992;30:243–248. doi: 10.1016/0020-7101(92)90028-Q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Langlotz CP, Even-Shoshan O, Seshadri SS, et al. A methodology for the economic assessment of PACS. J Digit Imaging. 1995;8:95–102. doi: 10.1007/BF03168132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Gur D, Straub WH, Lieberman RH, et al. Clinicians’ access to diagnostic imaging information at an academic center: perceived impact on patient management. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;158:893–896. doi: 10.2214/ajr.158.4.1546613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Straub WH, Gur D. The hidden costs of delayed access to diagnostic information: impact on PACS implementation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990;155:613–616. doi: 10.2214/ajr.155.3.2117364. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Chang PJ, Channin DS, Prior FW, et al: The film library, part 1. RSNA Special Course in Computers in Radiology 1997, pp. 37–46

Articles from Journal of Digital Imaging are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES