Literature DB >> 12893692

Picture archiving and communication systems: the users' view.

J R Pilling1.   

Abstract

A study was undertaken to assess the acceptability to users of a Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS). A questionnaire was issued to 208 users. Some questions required a graduated score in response and others a free text response. 101 responses were received from a cross section of hospital staff. The majority of users judged PACS to be a major advance for the hospital, with high quality images, less frustration than using film and an improvement in their working lives. They judged that it had made a positive change in their working practices and had met their expectations. They welcomed the access it gave them to Radiology reports. There was more ambivalence about the impact it had made to the efficiency of clinic consultations and the conduct of ward rounds. Free text responses were made concerning the benefits and disadvantages of PACS. Analysis of these demonstrated many more benefits than disadvantages. The Radiology department has been enabled to address the concerns of staff raised through the questionnaire, and has been encouraged by the positive responses. PACS has been accepted well by a wide cross section of hospital staff. It has improved their working lives and made a major contribution to the working of the hospital as a whole.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12893692     DOI: 10.1259/bjr/67551353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  12 in total

1.  Physicians' views and assessments on picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) in two Turkish public hospitals.

Authors:  Mehmet Top
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2012-03-04       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Evolutionistic or revolutionary paths? A PACS maturity model for strategic situational planning.

Authors:  Rogier van de Wetering; Ronald Batenburg; Reeva Lederman
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 3.  A systematic review of the literature on multidisciplinary rounds to design information technology.

Authors:  Ayse P Gurses; Yan Xiao
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2006-02-24       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Digital repeat analysis; setup and operation.

Authors:  J Nol; G Isouard; J Mirecki
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Difficulties with the picture archive and communication system for the transferred patient.

Authors:  Katherine G Yallop; Erica Makin
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.791

6.  A filmless radiology teaching conference system for pertinent displaying and image searching.

Authors:  Katsumi Abe; Mitsuhiro Narata; Ikue Tanaka; Motoichiro Takahashi; Akihito Igarashi; Takahiro Sasaki; Kazuya Matsuyama; Naokaz Tohi; Shigeru Kosuda
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Do clinicians read our reports? Integrating the radiology information system with the electronic patient record: experiences from the first 2 years.

Authors:  Petter Hurlen; Truls Østbye; Arne Borthne; Fredrik A Dahl; Pål Gulbrandsen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Virtual organization of hospital medical imaging: a user satisfaction survey.

Authors:  Claude Sicotte; Guy Paré; Kobena Kra Bini; Marie-Pierre Moreault; Guy Laverdure
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Assessing task-technology fit in a PACS upgrade: do users' and developers' appraisals converge?

Authors:  Luigi Lepanto; Claude Sicotte; Pascale Lehoux
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.056

10.  Modifying clinicians use of PACS imaging.

Authors:  Madusha Chandratilleke; Stepfen Honeybul
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.056

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.