Reporting Worklist Prioritization - Proposal

From IHE Wiki
Revision as of 19:06, 12 August 2021 by Kevino (talk | contribs) (Created page with "__NOTOC__ ==1. Proposed Workitem: Reporting Worklist Prioritization== * Proposal Editor: Antje Schroeder, Kevin O'Donnell, Teri Sippel * Editor: TBA * Domain: Radiology ==2...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

1. Proposed Workitem: Reporting Worklist Prioritization

  • Proposal Editor: Antje Schroeder, Kevin O'Donnell, Teri Sippel
  • Editor: TBA
  • Domain: Radiology

2. The Problem

At any point in time, there are N items on the reading worklist when a new reading task arrives, so the Reading Worklist Manager has to choose to prioritize the new task into one of N+1 possible positions on the list.

While the logic (and preferences) for which other tasks a task should come before is internal to the reading worklist provider (and hopefully customizable), all the details for each task that may be relevant to prioritization come from outside the reading worklist provider so getting access to them is an interoperability problem.

An AI Application that detects lung nodules or that rules out strokes can't tell the reading worklist provider where to prioritize a new study in the worklist because the AI Application doesn't know what else is on the worklist. But the AI can contribute positive or negative findings that can feed the logic of the worklist provider. Other systems will also need to provide (and update) relevant information. And certain details that the worklist provider wants will need the encoding to be standardized (especially if it comes from multiple implementations)

3. Key Use Case

Details of the use case should spell out:

  • What pieces of information does the prioritizer need/use to prioritize worklist items
  • priority of the underlying imaging order
  • agreed turn around times (service level agreements)
  • admitting diagnosis, reason for procedure
  • imaging procedure type
  • patient type/location
  • Reading Physician availability
  • known/suspected risks to the patient
  • preliminary findings from one or more AI algorithms
  • stoke is present, stroke is absent
  • severity of blot cot (large/small, located in a critical area or a non-critical area)
  • confidence of finding
  • What system(s) can provide each piece of information and how is it encoded, e.g.
  • some from modality (via PACS) in the image header
  • some from analysis application encoded in DICOM SR content
  • some from the Order Placer in the incoming Order message
  • some from a support system in a Procedure Update OMI, ….
  • What codesets are used for certain concepts, e.g.
  • finding codes, severity codes, etc.

The profile should define:

  • What system has the relevant information listed above
  • How that system encodes and conveys that information to the prioritizer
  • Whether to proxy/aggregate the information to make it more digestible for a prioritizer

4. Standards and Systems

Systems:

  • Reporting Worklist Manager (RIS/PACS)
  • PACS - study data source
  • AI Applications - presence/absence of various findings
  • EMR - admission and patient record information
  • Staff/Scheduling System - expertise and availability of reading staff


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?>


<This is the brief proposal. Try to keep it to 1 or at most 2 pages>