PROBLEM: The goal of the current article is to demonstrate how qualitative and monetary effects resulting from an integrated RIS/PACS installation can be evaluated. METHODS: First of all, the system concept of a RIS/PACS solution for a university hospital is defined and described. Based on this example, a generic method for the evaluation of qualitative and monetary effects as well as associated risks is depicted and demonstrated. To this end, qualitative analyses, investment calculations and risk analysis are employed. RESULTS: The sample analysis of a RIS/PACS solution specially designed for a university hospital demonstrates positive qualitative and monetary effects of the system. Under ideal conditions the payoff time of the investments is reached after 4 years of an assumed 8 years effective life of the system. Furthermore, under conservative assumptions, the risk analysis shows a probability of 0% for realising a negative net present value at the end of the payoff time period. CONCLUSION: It should be pointed out that the positive result of this sample analysis will not necessarily apply to other clinics or hospitals. However, the same methods may be used for the individual evaluation of the qualitative and monetary effects of a RIS/PACS installation in any clinic.
PROBLEM: The goal of the current article is to demonstrate how qualitative and monetary effects resulting from an integrated RIS/PACS installation can be evaluated. METHODS: First of all, the system concept of a RIS/PACS solution for a university hospital is defined and described. Based on this example, a generic method for the evaluation of qualitative and monetary effects as well as associated risks is depicted and demonstrated. To this end, qualitative analyses, investment calculations and risk analysis are employed. RESULTS: The sample analysis of a RIS/PACS solution specially designed for a university hospital demonstrates positive qualitative and monetary effects of the system. Under ideal conditions the payoff time of the investments is reached after 4 years of an assumed 8 years effective life of the system. Furthermore, under conservative assumptions, the risk analysis shows a probability of 0% for realising a negative net present value at the end of the payoff time period. CONCLUSION: It should be pointed out that the positive result of this sample analysis will not necessarily apply to other clinics or hospitals. However, the same methods may be used for the individual evaluation of the qualitative and monetary effects of a RIS/PACS installation in any clinic.