Rad Plan Minutes 2008-09-17

Attendees

• David Clunie, MD - RadPharm
• Chris Lindop - GE (Co-chair)
• Kevin O'Donnell - Toshiba (Co-chair)
• Paul Seifert - Agfa
• Peter Mildenberger, MD - ESR
• David Mendelson, MD - RSNA
• Jerold Wallis, MD - SNM
• Joan McMillen - RSNA
• Nichole Drye-Mayo - RSNA
• Chris Carr - RSNA

Minutes

Review of Brief Profile Proposals

• Estimate bandwidth of Technical Committee to review proposals

• Likely to be no greater than previous cycle: limits number of complex new profiles that could be developed

• Establish general strategy for development cycle: aggressive development or consolidation?

• Consolidation year would risk losing momentum and making it difficult to retain participants
• There is work to do in imaging and demand from ONC in the US and other national entities for imaging solutions compatible with EHR projects

• Establish strategic priorities within domain

• Devote entire development cycle to image-sharing issues?
• Politically hot topic: meets objectives of RSNA RIC, AMA/ACR committee on MR Safety, ONC and EHR projects
• Package of XDS-I, XCA-I, PDI, Basic Image Review and Image Management Enhancements could be grouped around this theme
• Resolution: Include all the image-sharing proposals in Technical Committee review process; In addition to individual effort estimates, request Technical Committee evaluate working on them as a package

• Initial estimate of effort level for each proposal (Note: final estimate belongs to Tech Cmte)

• Rad Plan Minutes 2008-09-03 Include level of effort estimates for the profiles below:
• Enhanced DICOM Objects: Medium
• XDS-I Using XDS.b Technology: Medium to High

• Scope of development is key question: simple upgrade of XDS.a transactions to XDS.b or reworking of transfer protocols to Web services model (in coordination with DICOM WG10)?

• PDI Extensions: Low to Medium
• Basic Image Review: Low to Medium
• Scheduled Workflow II Phase 2: Medium to High
• Cross Community Access for Imaging (XCA-I): no estimate provided
• Mammography Workstation Bidirectional Interface: Hard to assess effort without clear definition of technical scope
• Image Management Enhancements: no estimate provided

Approach to Updating XDS-I to Use XDS.b Technology

• Need to decide upon the scope of development
  • XDS-I and image sharing across care sites is a politically hot topic
  • Will updating XDS-I to XDS.b lead to dramatic improvement in adoption?
  • What compatibility issues does that raise? (ITI chose not to make XDS.b intrinsically support XDS.a systems)
  • 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/roadmap of image sharing approaches (eg, XDS-I, XCA, PDI)

Mammography Workstation Bidirectional Interface

• Invite Dr. Ellis and other clinical reps to convene Mammo Cmte to address this in current cycle

• Action Item: Chris Carr to contact Dr. Ellis and rest of Mammography Subcommittee to encourage them to consider work on this profile

Approach to Addressing Scheduled Workflow II Phase 2 - Brief Proposal

• Consider whether it is possible to limit scope of work to moving from HL7 2.3 to 2.5 without other workflow improvement elements
• Minimum scope includes removing some options, providing identity of operator in PPS
• Defer to future cycles analysis of detailed order entry (requested by IHE-J and some US sites)
• Challenge will be allowing scope to expand in course of writing
• Chris Lindop takes responsibility for being lead author of changes

• Action Item: Chris Lindop to rewrite proposal with more limited scope

Vote on Proposals to go on Short List

• Forward all profiles except Mammo Bidirectional Interface and Enhanced DICOM Objects to Radiology Technical Committee
• Version of SWFII forwarded should be scoped down as described above

• Action: Rad Plan Co-chairs will send the Short List to Tech Cmte for feasibility and effort evaluation

Planning for RSNA

• Switch David Clunie in for Kevin O'Donnell on Tues, Dec. 2, 1:30-2:15
• Not necessary to have detailed content review session
• Action Item: Schedule check-status call for Nov. 5, 11am CT

Next Tcon

• To be scheduled via email

Radiology Planning Committee