Difference between revisions of "Data Retention - Brief Proposal"
(New page: ==1. Proposed Profile: Data Retention== *Proposal Editor: David Heaney, David.Heaney@mckesson.com *Date: August 25, 2009 *Version: 1.0 *Domain: Radiology, Cardiology ==2. The Problem== ...) |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | __NOTOC__ | ||
==1. Proposed Profile: Data Retention== | ==1. Proposed Profile: Data Retention== | ||
− | *Proposal Editor: David Heaney, David.Heaney@mckesson.com | + | * Proposal Editor: David Heaney, David.Heaney@mckesson.com |
− | + | * Domain: Radiology, Cardiology | |
− | |||
− | *Domain: Radiology, Cardiology | ||
==2. The Problem== | ==2. The Problem== | ||
− | To contain storage costs and support data retention policies defined by customers, there is | + | To contain storage costs and support data retention policies defined by customers, there is a need to support study deletion across multiple systems. |
+ | |||
+ | Federated PACS, enterprise and regional long term archives can result in multiple copies of data being stored on different systems. When a study is deleted on one 'Image Manager' there is no way to notify other 'Image Managers' to perform the same action. | ||
+ | |||
+ | A separate system that handles data retention policies, also requires the same type of transaction to notify one or more 'Image Managers' that a particular study should be deleted. | ||
==3. Key Use Case== | ==3. Key Use Case== | ||
− | A group of hospitals each have local PACS, and possibly other dedicated Image Managers for Mammography, Cardiology, etc. These local PACS are in turn connected to a regional central archive. | + | A group of hospitals each have local PACS, and possibly other dedicated Image Managers for Mammography, Cardiology, etc. |
− | Data retention policies trigger the condition that particular types of studies older than a certain number of years should be deleted. How can all these systems be notified that they must delete any data they may have related to these studies? | + | |
+ | These local PACS are in turn connected to a regional central archive. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Data retention policies trigger the condition that particular types of studies older than a certain number of years should be deleted. | ||
+ | |||
+ | How can all these systems be notified that they must delete any data they may have related to these studies? | ||
==4. Standards & Systems== | ==4. Standards & Systems== |
Revision as of 22:00, 26 August 2009
1. Proposed Profile: Data Retention
- Proposal Editor: David Heaney, David.Heaney@mckesson.com
- Domain: Radiology, Cardiology
2. The Problem
To contain storage costs and support data retention policies defined by customers, there is a need to support study deletion across multiple systems.
Federated PACS, enterprise and regional long term archives can result in multiple copies of data being stored on different systems. When a study is deleted on one 'Image Manager' there is no way to notify other 'Image Managers' to perform the same action.
A separate system that handles data retention policies, also requires the same type of transaction to notify one or more 'Image Managers' that a particular study should be deleted.
3. Key Use Case
A group of hospitals each have local PACS, and possibly other dedicated Image Managers for Mammography, Cardiology, etc.
These local PACS are in turn connected to a regional central archive.
Data retention policies trigger the condition that particular types of studies older than a certain number of years should be deleted.
How can all these systems be notified that they must delete any data they may have related to these studies?
4. Standards & Systems
Web Services transactions similar to those used in IHE XDS-I.
5. Discussion
Vendors are already implementing Web Services based solutions for data retention related messaging but in a proprietary manner. There is a strong demand for this to be supported by IHE and this would likely result in quick uptake and implementation by vendors if such a Profile is developed.