Key Points
The transition from a film-based to a completely digital organization cannot be accomplished by merely replacing individual components. In contrast, the whole flow of operations needs reengineer-ing. This affects not only the way individual physicians or radiographers interact with workstations or imaging modalities, but also the overall process of medical cooperation.
The individual components of PACS, RIS, and other information systems must be integrated to a higher degree than one may expect. This requires new strategic decisions regarding the deployment of information systems and regarding the relationship of the radiology department to the technology infrastructure.
Information technology opens up completely new applications such as telemammography. Merely introducing technology will not provide the expected results, as concepts and technology fundamentally depend on the organization of tele-cooperation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bacher K, Smeets P, De Hauwere A et al (2006) Image quality performance of liquid crystal display systems: influence of display resolution, magnification and window settings on contrast-detail detection. Eur J Radiol 58(3):471–479
Bellon E, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Suetens P et al (1994) Multimedia e-mail systems for computer-assisted radiological communication. Med Inform 19(2):139–148
Berns EA, Hendrick RE, Solari M et al (2006) Digital and screen-film mammography: comparison of image acquisition and interpretation times. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187(1):38–41
Bick U, Diekmann F (2007) Digital mammography: what do we and what don't we know? Eur J Radiol 17:1931–1942
Bick U, Diekmann F, Fallenberg EM (2008) [Workflow in digital screening mammography]. Radiologe 48(4):335–344 (article in German)
Ciatto S, Brancato B, Baglioni R et al (2006) A methodology to evaluate differential costs of full field digital as compared to conventional screen film mammography in a clinical setting. Eur J Radiol 57(1):69–75
Haygood TM, Wang J, Atkinson EN et al (2009) Timed effi-ciency of interpretation of digital and film-screen screening mammograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192(1):216–220
IHE (2005) IHE radiology user's handbook. IHE, Chicago
IHE (2007a) IHE radiology: mammography user's handbook. IHE, Chicago
IHE (2007b) IHE radiology technical framework revision 8.0. IHE, Chicago
IHE (2008) IHE radiology technical frame work supplement 2007–08: mammography acquisition workflow. IHE, Chicago
Ishiyama M, Tsunoda-Shimizu H, Kikuchi M et al (2009) Comparison of reading time between screen-film mam-mography and soft-copied, full-field digital mammogra-phy. Breast Cancer 16(1):58–61
Koff D, Bak P, Brownrigg P et al (2008) Pan-Canadian evaluation of irreversible compression ratios (“lossy” compression) for development of national guidelines. J Digit Imaging (Epub ahead of print)
Leader JK, Hakim CM, Ganott MA et al (2006) A multisite tele-mammography system for remote management of screening mammography: an assessment of technical, operational, and clinical issues. J Digit Imaging 19(3):216–225
Loose R, Braunschweig R, Kotter E et al (2009) [Compression of digital images in radiology - results of a consensus conference] Rofo 181(1):32–37 (article in German)
Moore SM (2003) Using the IHE scheduled work flow integration profile to drive modality efficiency. Radiographics 23(2):523–529
Oosterwijk H (2005) DICOM: DICOM basics, 3rd edn. OTech. Aubrey, TX
Penedo M, Souto M, Tahoces PG et al (2005) Free-response receiver operating characteristic evaluation of lossy JPEG2000 and object-based set partitioning in hierarchical trees compression of digitized mammograms. Radiology 237:450–457
Pisano ED, Cole EB, Kistner EO et al (2002) Interpretation of digital mammograms: comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed-film display. Radiology 223(2):483–488
Pisano ED, Zuley M, Baum JK et al (2007) Issues to consider in converting to digital mammography. Radiol Clin North Am 45(5):813–830
Seeram E (2006) Irreversible compression in digital radiology. A literature review. Radiography 12:45–59
Shaw de Paredes E, Lopez FW, Strickland WJ et al (2007) Telemammography: interfacing between primary physicians and experts. Appl Radiol 36(9):26–30
The Royal College of Radiologists (Board of the Faculty of Clinical Radiology) (2008) The adoption of lossy image data compression for the purpose of clinical interpretation. http://www.rcr.ac.uk/docs/radiology/pdf/IT_guidance_LossyApr08.pdf/
Trambert M (2006a) Digital mammography integrated with PACS: real world issues, considerations, workflow solutions, and reading paradigms. Semin Breast Dis 9:75–81
Trambert M (2006b) A perfect match – Integrating digital mammography with RIS/PACS and mammography QA. Image (www.rt-image.com) 19(8)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ongeval, C.V., Bellon, E., Deprez, T., Steen, A.V., Marchal, G. (2010). Digital Workflow, PACS, and Telemammography. In: Bick, U., Diekmann, F. (eds) Digital Mammography. Medical Radiology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78450-0_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78450-0_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-78449-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-78450-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)