Difference between revisions of "Rad Plan Minutes 2008-09-17"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
** Identify champions and work groups for profiles where possible | ** Identify champions and work groups for profiles where possible | ||
* Establish strategic priorities within domain | * Establish strategic priorities within domain | ||
| − | + | ** Devote entire development cycle to image-sharing issues? | |
* Select "short list" to provide to Technical Committee | * Select "short list" to provide to Technical Committee | ||
* Discussion of each proposal will be limited to 5-10 minutes | * Discussion of each proposal will be limited to 5-10 minutes | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
====Enhanced DICOM Objects - Brief Proposal==== | ====Enhanced DICOM Objects - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| + | |||
====XDS-I Using XDS.b Technology - Brief Proposal==== | ====XDS-I Using XDS.b Technology - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| − | * Need to decide upon the scope of development | + | * Fits with image-sharing strategy |
| + | * Need to decide upon the scope of development | ||
** XDS-I and image sharing across care sites is a politically hot topic | ** XDS-I and image sharing across care sites is a politically hot topic | ||
** Is it a problem IHE can advance a useful solution for and achieve adoption? | ** Is it a problem IHE can advance a useful solution for and achieve adoption? | ||
| Line 30: | Line 32: | ||
** Add PHR use case to XDS-I? | ** Add PHR use case to XDS-I? | ||
** Address Web services-based transfer protocol for images in coordination with DICOM WG10 and ITI? | ** Address Web services-based transfer protocol for images in coordination with DICOM WG10 and ITI? | ||
| + | ** Important to engage current adopters (eg, CHI and vendor adopters) to ensure that approach chosen is helpful and does not introduce incompatibility with adopted approaches: need to justify any incompatibilities introduced | ||
** Canadian model is to establish centralized architecture for DI: regional PACS | ** Canadian model is to establish centralized architecture for DI: regional PACS | ||
| − | + | ** Need to assess current priority of addressing networked model vs. upgrading PDI solutions for removable media (driven by AMA, ACR concerns) | |
| − | + | ** Need to engage referring physicians in working on practical solutions for image exchange | |
| − | + | ::* Action Item: Planning Committee to engage user adopters and gather their experience | |
| − | + | ::* Action Item: Planning Committee to contact vendor adopters from Connectathon results db and request their input on approaches to update profile | |
| − | + | ::* Action Item: Technical Committee to assess compatibility issues raised by upgrading to XDS.b | |
| − | + | ::* Action Item: Planning Committee to flesh out and clarify use case to be addressed | |
| + | ::* Action Item: Planning Committee to develop coordinated view of image sharing approaches | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ====PDI Extensions - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| + | * Fits with image-sharing strategy | ||
| + | ====Basic Image Review - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| + | * Fits with image-sharing strategy | ||
| + | ====Mammography Workstation Bidirectional Interface==== | ||
| + | ====Scheduled Workflow II Phase 2 - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| + | ====Cross Community Access for Imaging (XCA-I) - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| + | * Fits with image-sharing strategy | ||
| + | ====Image Management Enhancements - Brief Proposal==== | ||
| + | * Fits with image-sharing strategy | ||
===Vote on Proposals to go on Short List=== | ===Vote on Proposals to go on Short List=== | ||
Revision as of 09:32, 17 September 2008
Attendees
- David Clunie, MD - RadPharm
- Chris Lindop - GE (Co-chair)
- Kevin O'Donnell - Toshiba (Co-chair)
- Paul Seifert - Agfa
- Peter Mildenberger, MD - DRG
- David Mendelson, MD - RSNA
- Jerold Wallis, MD - SNM
Minutes
Review of Brief Profile Proposals
- Estimate bandwidth of Technical Committee to review proposals
- Establish general strategy for development cycle: aggressive development or consolidation?
- Estimate effort level required with each proposal
- Identify champions and work groups for profiles where possible
- Establish strategic priorities within domain
- Devote entire development cycle to image-sharing issues?
- Select "short list" to provide to Technical Committee
- Discussion of each proposal will be limited to 5-10 minutes
Enhanced DICOM Objects - Brief Proposal
XDS-I Using XDS.b Technology - Brief Proposal
- Fits with image-sharing strategy
- Need to decide upon the scope of development
- XDS-I and image sharing across care sites is a politically hot topic
- Is it a problem IHE can advance a useful solution for and achieve adoption?
- Will updating XDS-I to XDS.b lead to dramatic improvement in adoption?
- Within a given PACS environment, Web access is a feature already typically available
- Add PHR use case to XDS-I?
- Address Web services-based transfer protocol for images in coordination with DICOM WG10 and ITI?
- Important to engage current adopters (eg, CHI and vendor adopters) to ensure that approach chosen is helpful and does not introduce incompatibility with adopted approaches: need to justify any incompatibilities introduced
- Canadian model is to establish centralized architecture for DI: regional PACS
- Need to assess current priority of addressing networked model vs. upgrading PDI solutions for removable media (driven by AMA, ACR concerns)
- Need to engage referring physicians in working on practical solutions for image exchange
- Action Item: Planning Committee to engage user adopters and gather their experience
- Action Item: Planning Committee to contact vendor adopters from Connectathon results db and request their input on approaches to update profile
- Action Item: Technical Committee to assess compatibility issues raised by upgrading to XDS.b
- Action Item: Planning Committee to flesh out and clarify use case to be addressed
- Action Item: Planning Committee to develop coordinated view of image sharing approaches
PDI Extensions - Brief Proposal
- Fits with image-sharing strategy
Basic Image Review - Brief Proposal
- Fits with image-sharing strategy
Mammography Workstation Bidirectional Interface
Scheduled Workflow II Phase 2 - Brief Proposal
Cross Community Access for Imaging (XCA-I) - Brief Proposal
- Fits with image-sharing strategy
Image Management Enhancements - Brief Proposal
- Fits with image-sharing strategy
Vote on Proposals to go on Short List
- Action: Rad Plan Cochairs will send the Short List to Tech Cmte for feasibility and effort evaluation