PDI Extensions - Detailed Proposal

1. Proposed Workitem: PDI Extensions

• Proposal Editor: David Clunie
• Profile Editor: David Clunie
• Date: 2008-10-01
• Domain: Radiology (Mammo, NM), Cardiology, Radiation Oncology

Summary

The existing IHE PDI profile supports CDs only, and does not use compression (lossless or lossy) for radiology images. Modern acquisition techniques often produce single data sets that exceed the available PDI CD capacity, and disk spanning (using multiple CDs for one study) makes them difficult (and slow) to view.

DICOM supports larger (DVD) and faster (USB memory) media already, and provides for both lossless and lossy compression as clinically appropriate. Fears of lack of DVD interoperability have been allayed by successful media readability tests performated at the 2008 IHE NA Connectathon.

PDI can easily be extended to support DVD and USB with minimal changes by adding the relevant DICOM Media Application Profiles to PDI.

No PC in recent history has been shipped without both DVD drives and USB connectors.

Increasing attention on image sharing and media interoperability demands that PDI make use of contemporary rather than obsolete technology to satisfy users demands.

2. The Problem

IHE Radiology has defined a reliable mechanism to create, (transport,) present, and import DICOM data on CD-ROM.

IHE PDI does not describe what to do if the data exceeds the size of a CD (~700MB).

Study sizes continue to grow. The cost of larger media continues to fall. PDI support for DVD and USB media would help.

Referring physicians continue to be frustrated trying to integrate patient imaging data arriving on media into their practice workflow.

4. Standards & Systems

The necessary DICOM specifications for DVD and USB exist.

DVD media compatibility was largely confirmed in the 2008 Connectathon experiments.

5. Technical Approach

PDI-DVD Extension

Define PDI on DVD media.

PDI-USB Extension

Define PDI on USB media.

PDI Review Profile

Define workflow for review of PDI media in physician offices.

<DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE DIRECTLY. See Templates for instructions on using templates.>

---

This Delta Proposal Template is for expanding copy of a Brief Proposal into a Detailed Proposal. This template and the Detailed Proposal Template should be updated in sync.

• Paste this text into a copy of your Brief Proposal
• Move the Summary section to the end of Section 1
• Expand details in the Use Case Section
• Distribute material in the Discussion Section into the other bottom sections.

---

5. Technical Approach

<This section can be very short but include as much detail as you like. The Technical Committee will flesh it out when doing the effort estimation.>

<Outline how the standards could be used/refined to solve the problems in the Use Cases. The Technical Committee will be responsible for the full design and may choose to take a different approach, but a sample design is a good indication of feasibility.>

<If a phased approach would make sense indicate some logical phases. This may be because standards are evolving, because the problem is too big to solve at once, or because there are unknowns that won’t be resolved soon.>

Existing actors

<Indicate what existing actors could be used or might be affected by the profile.>

New actors

<List possible new actors>

Existing transactions

<Indicate how existing transactions might be used or might need to be extended.>

New transactions (standards used)

<Describe possible new transactions (indicating what standards would likely be used for each. Transaction diagrams are very helpful here. Feel free to go into as much detail as seems useful.>

Impact on existing integration profiles

<Indicate how existing profiles might need to be modified.>

New integration profiles needed

<Indicate what new profile(s) might need to be created.>

Breakdown of tasks that need to be accomplished

<A list of tasks would be helpful for the technical committee who will have to estimate the effort required to design, review and implement the profile.>

6. Support & Resources

<List groups that have expressed support for the proposal and resources that would be available to accomplish the tasks listed above.>

7. Risks

<List technical or political risks that will need to be considered to successfully field the profile.>

8. Open Issues

<Point out any key issues or design problems. This will be helpful for estimating the amount of work and demonstrates thought has already gone into the candidate profile.>

9. Tech Cmte Evaluation

<The technical committee will use this area to record details of the effort estimation, etc.>

Effort Evaluation (as a % of Tech Cmte Bandwidth):

• 35% for ...

Responses to Issues:

See italics in Risk and Open Issue sections

Candidate Editor:

TBA

<Delete this Category Templates line since your specific Profile Proposal page is no longer a template.>