OBJECTIVE: We investigated the impact on radiologist reporting time of the change from conventional film to hard-copy computerized radiography and of the subsequent move to soft-copy images on picture archiving and communication system (PACS) workstations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A controlled before and after research design was undertaken. Data were collected on four occasions: two relating to conventional film, one relating to hard-copy computerized radiography, and one relating to soft-copy PACS images. Data collection was by direct observation of radiology reporting sessions by independent health service researchers. Data were collected on report times, details of images viewed, characteristics of the radiologist, and details of interruptions. To control for potential biases in the before and after comparisons, ordinary least squares multiple regression analysis was used. The principal comparison was between reports with PACS and reports with computerized radiography hard-copy because no change was noted in the organization of the reporting process between these two data collection rounds other than the introduction of the PACS. RESULTS: Data were collected on a total of 5568 report observations. Report time in the PACS data collection period was not significantly different (p = .32) than that in the computerized radiography hard-copy period. Reporting with the PACS was associated with significantly more (p < .01) historical images (i.e., images of the same patient obtained in previous examinations) being viewed. CONCLUSION: Report time was not lengthened by the introduction of the PACS. The finding that more historical images were viewed when the PACS was in use indicates that the PACS brought about a positive change in reporting practice.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the impact on radiologist reporting time of the change from conventional film to hard-copy computerized radiography and of the subsequent move to soft-copy images on picture archiving and communication system (PACS) workstations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A controlled before and after research design was undertaken. Data were collected on four occasions: two relating to conventional film, one relating to hard-copy computerized radiography, and one relating to soft-copy PACS images. Data collection was by direct observation of radiology reporting sessions by independent health service researchers. Data were collected on report times, details of images viewed, characteristics of the radiologist, and details of interruptions. To control for potential biases in the before and after comparisons, ordinary least squares multiple regression analysis was used. The principal comparison was between reports with PACS and reports with computerized radiography hard-copy because no change was noted in the organization of the reporting process between these two data collection rounds other than the introduction of the PACS. RESULTS: Data were collected on a total of 5568 report observations. Report time in the PACS data collection period was not significantly different (p = .32) than that in the computerized radiography hard-copy period. Reporting with the PACS was associated with significantly more (p < .01) historical images (i.e., images of the same patient obtained in previous examinations) being viewed. CONCLUSION: Report time was not lengthened by the introduction of the PACS. The finding that more historical images were viewed when the PACS was in use indicates that the PACS brought about a positive change in reporting practice.
Authors: B F King; B J Erickson; B Williamson; C C Reading; E M James; S K Ramthun; D A Owen Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 1999-05 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: C W Mattern; B F King; N J Hangiandreou; A Swenson; L L Jorgenson; W E Webbles; T W Okrzynski; B J Erickson; B Williamson; G S Forbes Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 1999-05 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Ahmed Hosny; Chintan Parmar; John Quackenbush; Lawrence H Schwartz; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Nat Rev Cancer Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 60.716