Difference between revisions of "Rad Plan Minutes 2009-09-03"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) (→Topics) |
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) (→Topics) |
||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
* Presentation of Processed Images | * Presentation of Processed Images | ||
− | ** | + | ** Currently there is no consistent way for modalities (that create overlays) and post-processing systems to make their compound image objects available for display and storage |
+ | ** Example of Mammo CAD SR shows the downside of profiling "one true way" for post-processing of a given image type: existing solutions taking different approaches will merely ignore the profile | ||
+ | ** Burden on receiving systems (PACS, displays) to handle multiple post-processing types: one approach would be to create table of allowed approaches that receiving systems would be required to support | ||
+ | ** Another approach might create a display profile that sets baseline for the different approaches an image display needs to support | ||
+ | ** Proposal includes three separate approaches: 1) simple overlay images, 2) compound objects such as annotations, 3) on-demand processing of pre-processed images where post-processing does not get stored in PACS | ||
+ | ** Michael Planchart willing to act as proposal editor | ||
+ | |||
+ | * DICOM Encoded Image Profile | ||
+ | ** Might be subsumed into Presentation of Processed Images profile | ||
+ | ** Don Mimlitch will be asked to work with Michael Planchart | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Diagnostic Imaging Repository Actor | ||
+ | ** Consensus is that some parts of this proposal could be folded into Change Management white paper | ||
+ | ** Ask author, David Heaney to clarify proposal to indicate what parts might be distinct proposal and what parts are covered by Change Management | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Data Retention | ||
+ | ** How policies about retaining and deleting images are implemented in a distributed environment | ||
+ | ** Might also be part of the Change Management white paper; identify deficiencies in XDS-I model | ||
+ | ** May involve coordination with ITI to address synchronization, change management issues | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ** Profile authors to submit any revisions prior to 2009-09-16 teleconference to make short list of proposals to be developed into detailed proposals | ||
+ | |||
** 2009-09-16: Teleconference to develop short list of profile proposals | ** 2009-09-16: Teleconference to develop short list of profile proposals |
Revision as of 11:29, 3 September 2009
Attendees
- Kinson Ho, Agfa
- Michael Planchart, Riverain Medical
- Peter Maton, Riverain Medical
- Lynn Felhofer, IHE Technical Project Manager
- Patricia Katzman, Aware
- John Paganini, Guardian Technologies
- Antje Schroder, Siemens
- David Clunie, RadPham
- Chris Lindop, GE
- Kevin O'Donnell, Toshiba
- Cor Loef, Philips
- Paul Seifert, Agfa
- David Mendelson, MD
- Joan McMillen, RSNA
- Nichole Drye-Mayo, RSNA
- Chris Carr, RSNA
Topics
1) First Review of the Profile Proposals with Authors Brief Profile Proposals
- Cardiac Imaging and Multi-Stack Spine Imaging
- Implementations of Enhanced DICOM Objects
- Cardiology domain needs to be consulted
- Imaging Object Change Management
- Changes made to image studies across and within enterprises create multiple copies that may change and diverge
- Many additional questions are raised by cross-enterprise information exchange
- In coordination with DICOM work, provide use cases for DICOM to address
- Goal is to develop white paper this year for profile development in current year,
- Kinson Ho and Genady Knizhik volunteer to be editors of white paper
- Scheduled Workflow 2.0
- Proposes many updates to SWF based on changes in HL7 transactions
- Opportunity to clarify and extend SWF transactions, including use of MPPS
- Physician Order Entry is related to SWF, but should be addressed as a separate profile in coordination with ITI (Kevin O'Donnell will post a separate proposal for this topic)
- Includes ordering codes such as RadLex Chargemaster and JJ1017
- Chris Lindop willing to act as profile editor
- Presentation of Processed Images
- Currently there is no consistent way for modalities (that create overlays) and post-processing systems to make their compound image objects available for display and storage
- Example of Mammo CAD SR shows the downside of profiling "one true way" for post-processing of a given image type: existing solutions taking different approaches will merely ignore the profile
- Burden on receiving systems (PACS, displays) to handle multiple post-processing types: one approach would be to create table of allowed approaches that receiving systems would be required to support
- Another approach might create a display profile that sets baseline for the different approaches an image display needs to support
- Proposal includes three separate approaches: 1) simple overlay images, 2) compound objects such as annotations, 3) on-demand processing of pre-processed images where post-processing does not get stored in PACS
- Michael Planchart willing to act as proposal editor
- DICOM Encoded Image Profile
- Might be subsumed into Presentation of Processed Images profile
- Don Mimlitch will be asked to work with Michael Planchart
- Diagnostic Imaging Repository Actor
- Consensus is that some parts of this proposal could be folded into Change Management white paper
- Ask author, David Heaney to clarify proposal to indicate what parts might be distinct proposal and what parts are covered by Change Management
- Data Retention
- How policies about retaining and deleting images are implemented in a distributed environment
- Might also be part of the Change Management white paper; identify deficiencies in XDS-I model
- May involve coordination with ITI to address synchronization, change management issues
- Profile authors to submit any revisions prior to 2009-09-16 teleconference to make short list of proposals to be developed into detailed proposals
- 2009-09-16: Teleconference to develop short list of profile proposals
- Cross-domain report, impacts to Radiology
- Board report, impacts to Radiology
- Technical Committee report, 2009 Trial Implimentation Profile readiness for Final text: Technical Committee Minutes 2009.09.02
- www.ihe.net radiology content review
- IHE Radiology Communications Strategy 2010
- NA Connectathon Trial Implementation Profile Promotion
- RSNA, HIMSS, SIIM, AHRA, ...
- SIIM Abstracts closes Sept 11
- 2010 Calendar Review
Need to update Plan Cmte Roster to show voting privileges