Difference between revisions of "Presentation of Processed Images - Brief Proposal"
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
Images should be consumed and displayed by PACS viewing workstations in a way that compliments the viewing experience and workflow of the radiologist. | Images should be consumed and displayed by PACS viewing workstations in a way that compliments the viewing experience and workflow of the radiologist. | ||
| − | |||
==4. Standards & Systems== | ==4. Standards & Systems== | ||
Revision as of 16:05, 26 August 2009
1. Proposed Workitem: Presentation of Processed Images Profile
- Proposal Editor: Michael Planchart (GE?)
- Editor: <Name of candidate Lead Editor for the Profile, if known>
- Domain: Radiology and Cardiology
2. The Problem
Systems produce a variety of Processed images:
- Computer Aided Detection (CAD) results
- Soft tissue or bone subtraction images
- Residual or Temporal Subtraction images
These images (especially CAD) may have Region of Interest (ROI) coordinates provided as series 6000 overlay tags, GSPS annotations, or SR data.
However,
- Some hospitals do not want to store them in PACS, claiming liability issues or limited resources (e.g. memory, bandwidth, etc.),
- Some PACS viewers can't display the Regions of Interest (ROI) either by toggling on/off series 6000 overlay tags or by using the coordinates contained in the SR
- Some PACS viewers can't do "hanging protocols" unobtrusively in the workflow
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.>
Images should be consumed and displayed by PACS viewing workstations in a way that compliments the viewing experience and workflow of the radiologist.
4. Standards & Systems
<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?>
IHE should ...