Difference between revisions of "Encounter Based Imaging Workflow - Proposal"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
| − | ==1. Proposed Workitem: Encounter Based Imaging Workflow (EBIW)== | + | ==1. Proposed Workitem: Encounter-Based Imaging Workflow (EBIW)== |
* Proposal Editor: Kevin O'Donnell | * Proposal Editor: Kevin O'Donnell | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
==2. The Problem== | ==2. The Problem== | ||
| − | + | Encounter-based Imaging is presented as an alternative to Order-based Imaging (aka [[Scheduled Workflow]]). | |
| + | To draft SWF, the committee did a rather involved analysis including: | ||
| + | :* Use Cases - what are the different ways order-based imaging is performed | ||
| + | :* Metadata - what context details need to be captured, stored, conveyed | ||
| + | :* Linkage - what other artifacts do the images need to be linked to, and how | ||
| + | :* Communication - what notifications and "loop-closures" are needed | ||
| + | :* Data Transfer - what protocols should be used for the different artifacts | ||
| − | + | Encounter-based Imaging is a burgeoning area of activity, but a similar cross-vendor exercise has not been done. | |
| + | |||
| + | At the time, even with most vendors converging on similar concepts, the SWF exercise was valuable in teasing out subtle details, resolving elements of disagreement and confusion in the implementer community, and nailing down various technical details. | ||
| + | |||
| + | An EBI exercise could provide similar benefits in the expanded medical imaging community. It might also avoid silo-ization of the medical imaging record. | ||
==3. Key Use Case== | ==3. Key Use Case== | ||
| Line 21: | Line 31: | ||
''<Feel free to add a second use case scenario demonstrating how it “should” work. Try to indicate the people/systems, the tasks they are doing, the information they need, and hopefully where the information should come from.>'' | ''<Feel free to add a second use case scenario demonstrating how it “should” work. Try to indicate the people/systems, the tasks they are doing, the information they need, and hopefully where the information should come from.>'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | EBI Examples: | ||
| + | :* Dermatology | ||
| + | :* Wound Care/Management | ||
| + | :* Infectious Diseases | ||
| + | :* Burn Care | ||
| + | :* Ophthalmology | ||
| + | :* Plastic Surgery | ||
| + | :* Podiatry | ||
| + | :* ER/Trauma | ||
| + | :* Sports Medicine | ||
| + | :* Procedure (Surgery?) Video | ||
| + | ::* The video isn't ordered. Does Surgery fit the encounter model well? | ||
==4. Standards and Systems== | ==4. Standards and Systems== | ||
| − | + | Potential Systems | |
| + | :* Image Acquisition Devices (both Lightweight and Heavy/Integrated) | ||
| + | :* Image Archiving Devices | ||
| + | :* Electronic Medical Record Systems | ||
| + | :* Patient Management Systems? | ||
| − | + | Potential Standards | |
| + | :* Existing Profiles: PAM, WIC, SWF, MHD-I, XDS*, | ||
| + | :* DICOMweb | ||
| + | :* DICOM (DIMSE) | ||
| + | :* HL7 | ||
| + | :* FHIR | ||
| + | :* Consumer formats: JPEG, MPEG, PDF, etc | ||
==5. Discussion== | ==5. Discussion== | ||
| − | + | :Technical approach thoughts | |
| − | : | + | :: Perhaps new EBIW profile that parallels SWF |
| − | : | + | :: Perhaps expand WIC? |
| − | : | + | :: Consider focusing primarily/exclusively on FHIR and DICOMweb? |
| + | |||
| + | :This goes beyond the definition of Radiology, however RAD profiles have provided a basis for other imaging domains | ||
| + | :: RAD is the closest thing IHE has to a general Medical Imaging domain | ||
| + | :: Have TC members who understand the solution technologies well | ||
| + | :: Need contributors who understand the use cases well | ||
| + | ::: Would be advisable to solicit collaborators from Cardiology, Eyecare, and perhaps ITI | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
[[Internet-Ready_SWF_-_Proposal]] | [[Internet-Ready_SWF_-_Proposal]] | ||
Revision as of 16:39, 14 July 2016
1. Proposed Workitem: Encounter-Based Imaging Workflow (EBIW)
- Proposal Editor: Kevin O'Donnell
- Proposal Contributors: Elliot Silver, ...
- Editor:
- Contributors:
- Domain: Radiology
2. The Problem
Encounter-based Imaging is presented as an alternative to Order-based Imaging (aka Scheduled Workflow).
To draft SWF, the committee did a rather involved analysis including:
- Use Cases - what are the different ways order-based imaging is performed
- Metadata - what context details need to be captured, stored, conveyed
- Linkage - what other artifacts do the images need to be linked to, and how
- Communication - what notifications and "loop-closures" are needed
- Data Transfer - what protocols should be used for the different artifacts
Encounter-based Imaging is a burgeoning area of activity, but a similar cross-vendor exercise has not been done.
At the time, even with most vendors converging on similar concepts, the SWF exercise was valuable in teasing out subtle details, resolving elements of disagreement and confusion in the implementer community, and nailing down various technical details.
An EBI exercise could provide similar benefits in the expanded medical imaging community. It might also avoid silo-ization of the medical imaging record.
3. Key Use Case
<Describe a short use case scenario from the user perspective. The use case should demonstrate the integration/workflow problem.>
<Feel free to add a second use case scenario demonstrating how it “should” work. Try to indicate the people/systems, the tasks they are doing, the information they need, and hopefully where the information should come from.>
EBI Examples:
- Dermatology
- Wound Care/Management
- Infectious Diseases
- Burn Care
- Ophthalmology
- Plastic Surgery
- Podiatry
- ER/Trauma
- Sports Medicine
- Procedure (Surgery?) Video
- The video isn't ordered. Does Surgery fit the encounter model well?
4. Standards and Systems
Potential Systems
- Image Acquisition Devices (both Lightweight and Heavy/Integrated)
- Image Archiving Devices
- Electronic Medical Record Systems
- Patient Management Systems?
Potential Standards
- Existing Profiles: PAM, WIC, SWF, MHD-I, XDS*,
- DICOMweb
- DICOM (DIMSE)
- HL7
- FHIR
- Consumer formats: JPEG, MPEG, PDF, etc
5. Discussion
- Technical approach thoughts
- Perhaps new EBIW profile that parallels SWF
- Perhaps expand WIC?
- Consider focusing primarily/exclusively on FHIR and DICOMweb?
- This goes beyond the definition of Radiology, however RAD profiles have provided a basis for other imaging domains
- RAD is the closest thing IHE has to a general Medical Imaging domain
- Have TC members who understand the solution technologies well
- Need contributors who understand the use cases well
- Would be advisable to solicit collaborators from Cardiology, Eyecare, and perhaps ITI