Difference between revisions of "Federated DICOM Query Retrieve - Proposal"
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Clinical review of patients in a network | Clinical review of patients in a network | ||
:*Medical staff managing patients need access to all available images for a patient who may or may not have had imaging performed elsewhere in the network | :*Medical staff managing patients need access to all available images for a patient who may or may not have had imaging performed elsewhere in the network | ||
− | :*When viewing images for a patient, all images available anywhere in the network are listed and accessible for side-by-side display with local images at the users request within a clinically acceptable response time | + | :*When viewing images for a patient, all images available anywhere in the network are listed and accessible for side-by-side display with local images at the users request |
+ | ::*within a clinically acceptable response time | ||
+ | ::*grouped together and labelled with the patient's local Patient ID and related demographic information | ||
Trauma or other emergency transfer | Trauma or other emergency transfer | ||
Line 35: | Line 37: | ||
==4. Standards and Systems== | ==4. Standards and Systems== | ||
− | This is a "cross enterprise" scenario, but in the absence of the necessary infrastructure, [[Cross-enterprise_Document_Sharing_for_Imaging]] and [[Cross-Community_Access_-_Images_(XCA-I)]] may not be available, and there is a huge installed base of "conventional" PACS with DICOM Query/Retrieve Service interfaces that can be leveraged without requiring upgrades or new systems at every participating | + | This is a "cross enterprise" scenario, but in the absence of the necessary infrastructure or additional funding or resources or political will, [[Cross-enterprise_Document_Sharing_for_Imaging]] and [[Cross-Community_Access_-_Images_(XCA-I)]] may not be available, and there is a huge installed base of "conventional" PACS with DICOM Query/Retrieve Service interfaces that can be leveraged without requiring upgrades or new systems at every participating network site. |
− | Various proprietary solutions have been developed to address this problem, | + | Various proprietary solutions have been developed in the past to address this problem, including transmission to centralized archives and federated DICOM queries, and each may be appropriate to address specific deployment scenarios and best leverage available resources. The centralized archive approach has already been addressed by the [http://www.ihe.net/Technical_Framework/upload/IHE_RAD_Suppl_MIMA.pdf MIMA] profile. |
− | Though federated DICOM query/retrieve is available in commercial products, the package of capabilities | + | Though federated DICOM query/retrieve is available in commercial products, there is value in standardizing the package of capabilities necessary to satisfy the use cases and the handling of identifiers in the query and retrieve requests and in the returned retrieved objects has not been standardized, nor has the integration with sources of patient identity mapping between identity domains, using [[PIX]] or [[PDQ]]. |
Revision as of 06:44, 13 August 2015
1. Proposed Workitem: Federated DICOM Query/Retrieve (FDQR)
- Proposal Editor: David Clunie, Neelam Dugar, Kinson Ho
- Editor: Kinson Ho and David Clunie
- Date: N/A (Wiki keeps history)
- Version: N/A (Wiki keeps history)
- Domain: Radiology
2. The Problem
Patients are often treated in multiple hospitals within a clinical Network, e.g., an Oncology Network, Trauma Network, etc. Clinicians and radiologists managing patients need access to the full consolidated imaging history to provide efficient and effective treatments.
The medical scientific literature describes the consequence of the lack of such access as duplicate imaging with the attendant delays in care, costs and unnecessary radiation dose.
This continues to be a problem despite the use of CDs, the ability to "push" images on demand, proprietary imaging sharing solutions and other centralized architectures that presume the availability of non-trivial infrastructure resources and significant upgrades in functionality by each network participant.
3. Key Use Case
Clinical review of patients in a network
- Medical staff managing patients need access to all available images for a patient who may or may not have had imaging performed elsewhere in the network
- When viewing images for a patient, all images available anywhere in the network are listed and accessible for side-by-side display with local images at the users request
- within a clinically acceptable response time
- grouped together and labelled with the patient's local Patient ID and related demographic information
Trauma or other emergency transfer
- When medical staff at a receiving site are evaluating a patient for possible transfer from a remote site for advanced care, images acquired at the remote site are accessible to the evaluating staff
Reporting radiologist views priors
- When reporting locally acquired images, all available images for a patient elsewhere on the network are accessible as easily as locally acquired priors, and can be displayed side-by-side display with local images.
Prefetching
- For any use case, to the extent that the need for local viewing of images from elsewhere in the network can be anticipated, selective or complete pre-fetching may be needed to provide sufficient responsiveness to be clinically usable.
4. Standards and Systems
This is a "cross enterprise" scenario, but in the absence of the necessary infrastructure or additional funding or resources or political will, Cross-enterprise_Document_Sharing_for_Imaging and Cross-Community_Access_-_Images_(XCA-I) may not be available, and there is a huge installed base of "conventional" PACS with DICOM Query/Retrieve Service interfaces that can be leveraged without requiring upgrades or new systems at every participating network site.
Various proprietary solutions have been developed in the past to address this problem, including transmission to centralized archives and federated DICOM queries, and each may be appropriate to address specific deployment scenarios and best leverage available resources. The centralized archive approach has already been addressed by the MIMA profile.
Though federated DICOM query/retrieve is available in commercial products, there is value in standardizing the package of capabilities necessary to satisfy the use cases and the handling of identifiers in the query and retrieve requests and in the returned retrieved objects has not been standardized, nor has the integration with sources of patient identity mapping between identity domains, using PIX or PDQ.
<List existing systems that are/could be involved in the problem/solution.>
<If known, list standards which might be relevant to the solution>
5. Discussion
<Include additional discussion or consider a few details which might be useful for the detailed proposal>
- <Why IHE would be a good venue to solve the problem and what you think IHE should do to solve it.>
- <What might the IHE technical approach be? Existing Actors? New Transactions? Additional Profiles?>
- <What are some of the risks or open issues to be addressed?>
<This is the brief proposal. Try to keep it to 1 or at most 2 pages>
<Delete this Category Templates line since your specific Profile Proposal page is no longer a template.>