Rad Tech Minutes 08.07.15

Attendees

• Ruth Berge, GE
• Christoph Dickmann, Siemens
• Dick Donker, Philips
• Dave Heaney, McKesson
• Mike Henderson, Eastern Informatics
• Chris Lindop, GE
• Paul Seifert, Agfa
• Chris Carr, RSNA

Minutes

Scheduled Worflow II: Reviewed the open issues in Chris Lindop's draft document with comments from Christoph Dickmann to expand discussion in preparation for creating revised version of profile.

• Open Issues:

1. Image Manager/Image Archive Actor Grouping

• Radiology Acquisition Workflow may be a better name for a new profile than SWF II
• The question is whether to modify the way Image Manager and Image Archive are defined to either add transactions between them or possibly remove Image Archive from the profile
  • Transactions between Image Manager and Image Archive might be extensions of current DICOM transactions or non-DICOM (eg, HL7 or SQL)
• Use Cases for Defining Behaviors Between Image Manager and Image Archive:

1. Enable "plug and play" interoperability so sites could easily add or replace archives

2. Allow replacement of Image Manager without migration/replacement of Archive

3. General purpose archive that could store reports and other medical documents as well as images

4. Federation of Archives: Does this use case belong in a workflow profile? Federation of Image Managers is probably not feasible.

5. Distance reading: single archive shared by multiple image managers

2. Define grouping and roles of Department System Scheduler and Order Filler

• Enable scheduling to be managed by enterprise scheduling systems
• Possibly define Department Workflow Manager with great scheduling capabilities than current DSS: ability to coordinate acquisition with post-processing and reporting, etc.
• Currently the text does not include a clear definition of the roles of the DSS and OF actors
• Perhaps rename current limited functionality as "procedure planning" rather than "scheduling"
• Clarify or remove sections that refer to DSS independently

3. Reconcile ADT transactions with PAM and/or refactor and replace with references to PAM

• Some required transactions in SWF are optional in PAM: possible to add Radiology-specific "extensions" (ie, constraints) to PAM?
• Work through HL7 Task Force to map radiology requirements to PAM; develop appendix to be shared by ITI and Rad TFs describing relationship
• Exclude ADT from Rad AWF
• Probably include Order Placer in Rad AWF
• PAM provides ID management (including merge function) and encounter management
• PAM does not provide order management capabilities

• DSS can get order information directly from ADT for scheduling

• DSS/OF and OP actors would both have to be grouped with Receiver actor to get patient ID, demographics, etc.
• Possible to replace Patient Update transaction to Order Filler (RAD-12)with Patient Demographic Query transactions?

• PAM messages to Order Placer
• Legacy systems won't have PDQ capabilities

• Need to describe how OP and OF reconcile the information provided in order with information provided in PAM
• Identify "source of truth" for each class of data: for registration info, IDs and demographics, probably ADT
• OF has to manage patient ID info during course of task, but not maintain it persistently

• Report Repository and Image Mgr/Archive should have mechanism to update: currently provided by Order Filler in PIR

• Reasons to refactor registration messages and reference PAM: don't diverge from model and benefit from updates made to PAM
• Reference PAM or just lift transactions into Rad AWF?

4. Remove PPS Manager

Radiology Technical Committee