Rad Plan Minutes 2008-10-22: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
:::* Speed of transfers in working with large data sets is one of the key clinical benefits | :::* Speed of transfers in working with large data sets is one of the key clinical benefits | ||
:::* Enables higher-level interoperability among specialty applications (eg, cardiac systems) | :::* Enables higher-level interoperability among specialty applications (eg, cardiac systems) | ||
::* Scheduled Workflow II | |||
:::* Aligns SWF with PAM profile and development path of HL7 messaging | |||
:::* Adds study complete message | |||
:* Brief Review of [[Radiology Image Sharing Roadmap]] | :* Brief Review of [[Radiology Image Sharing Roadmap]] | ||
Revision as of 12:01, 22 October 2008
Attendees
- Chris Lindop (Co-chair) - GE
- Kevin O'Donnell (Co-chair) - Toshiba
- David Clunie, MD - RadPharm
- Dick Donker - Philips
- Dave Heaney - McKesson
- Mike Henderson - Eastern Informatics
- Genady Knizhnik - Agfa
- Cor Loef - Philips
- John Paganini - Guardian
- Paul Seifert - Agfa
- Niki Wirsz, PhD - Siemens
- Chris Carr - RSNA
- Nichole Drye-Mayo - RSNA
Minutes
Final Selection of 2008-09 Work Items
- Attendance & Review of Voting Privileges
- Reviewed Radiology Planning Committee Roster: Quorum attained; McKesson and Eastern Informatics take part in current meeting as non-voting participants
- Discussion of voting procedure
- Assemble slates of proposals reflecting work budget (roughly) and vote on slates
- Overview of Proposal Evaluations (See Table)
- General understanding of proposals within committee is good; focus on advocacy, reasons for priority
- Basic Image Review
- Addresses display requirements, particularly for consumption by referring physicians
- Urgency of need has been expressed by medical societies in US
- Model for setting display requirements is established in Nuc Med and Mammo display profiles
- PDI Extensions
- Addresses pressing, current need in radiology
- Activity by DRG and others in compression raises political stakes of addressing the issue now
- XDS-I Using XDS.b technology
- Aligns radiology with direction of ITI committees and implementation projects
- Strong desire in Radiology Informatics Committee to promote this as future direction of Image Sharing
- Image Management Enhancements
- Provides workflow functions (delete, replace, etc.) in distributed environments
- Addresses critical needs of current installations in Multi-PACS environments
- Question about whether underlying standards are in place to efficiently address the issue; concern about misusing standards
- Possible to address current implementation requirements through other authorities (eg, Canada Health Infoway)
- Raises additional use cases for working in a hybrid SWF/XDS environment
- Enhanced DICOM Objects
- Underlying standards are important and well established (including prior demonstrations); proposal for profile has been under consideration for 3 years
- Profile would be basis for series of clinically specific subprofiles
- Issues of working in a mixed environment would remain out of scope
- Speed of transfers in working with large data sets is one of the key clinical benefits
- Enables higher-level interoperability among specialty applications (eg, cardiac systems)
- Scheduled Workflow II
- Aligns SWF with PAM profile and development path of HL7 messaging
- Adds study complete message
- Brief Review of Radiology Image Sharing Roadmap
- Review of Proposal Evaluations (5 min each)
- Advocacy and Discussion
- Voting