1 / 34

LEARNING FROM SALISBURY’S PACS/RIS IMPLEMENTATION

LEARNING FROM SALISBURY’S PACS/RIS IMPLEMENTATION. Dr Shaun G McGee Consultant Radiologist and Lead Clinician Clinical Lead PACS/RIS Project Board. SALISBURY DISTRICT HOSPITAL. medium-sized acute trust 3* trust, Foundation Trust status applied for 637 beds

chase-woodward
Download Presentation

LEARNING FROM SALISBURY’S PACS/RIS IMPLEMENTATION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LEARNING FROM SALISBURY’S PACS/RIS IMPLEMENTATION Dr Shaun G McGee Consultant Radiologist and Lead Clinician Clinical Lead PACS/RIS Project Board

  2. SALISBURY DISTRICT HOSPITAL medium-sized acute trust 3* trust, Foundation Trust status applied for 637 beds regional plastics/maxillo-facial services supra-regional spinal injuries/rehabilitation, burns, cleft lip/palate

  3. Department of Clinical RadiologyPre PACS/RIS • 10 established Consultants (9.3WTE) from 5/05 • 120-130,000 examinations pa • 80-85% reporting coverage • All modalities except PET-CT • Office- or modality-based reporting • Report authorisation/verification in CT/MRI only • Kodak CR/mini PACS : Spinal Unit 1998 • Satellite GP plain film facilities Fordingbridge/Shaftesbury

  4. Department of Clinical RadiologyPre PACS/RIS : challenges • Workflow • Efficiency • Clinical Governance • Accommodation

  5. Workflow • Flexibility to adapt to changing patterns of demand • Effect culture change : take Mohammed to the Mountain

  6. Efficiency • Reporting turnaround times often slow • Timeliness of clinical reporting • Relevance of clinical reporting • Inefficiency = ↑ clinical risk • Improvement essential for 31/62 day and 18 week targets

  7. Clinical Governance • Inherent risk in with slow reporting turnaround • Large risk associated with unverified reports

  8. Accommodation • Shortage of office accommodation for 10 established consultants • Opportunity to separate reporting process from specific office location • Optimize use of available space

  9. PACS/RIS as a driver for change

  10. Preparation • Enterprise-wide objective • Early involvement of key stakeholders • High-level PMB representation • Partnership : Radiology/IT/LSP • Key Appointments • Project manager August 2004 • PACS manager April 2005

  11. Preparation • Construction of dedicated 100GByte LAN (completed Jan 2005) • Raising Awareness Programme (started Dec 2004) • Scoping local hardware requirements

  12. Raising Awareness : Objectives • Give warning of imminent change • Impart knowledge of new technologies • Begin process of consultation and engagement • Stimulate users to start to think about process changes necessary in PACS environment

  13. Raising Awareness • Multifaceted strategy • Talks/Lectures • Grand Round • Divisional/Department meetings • Q&A sessions • E-mail updates • Posters • Hands-on workshops

  14. Raising Awareness the old believe everything the middle aged suspect everything the young know everything Oscar Wilde 1894

  15. “Go Live” • Originally planned for Mar 2005 • Deferred to May 2005 • Occurred 16th July 2005 Did we have any concerns?

  16. Concerns prior to “go-live” • Equipment still being delivered and configured in final 48 hours • No dummy system in place – were we adequately trained? • Separate trainers for RIS and PACS with no one individual for training on the integrated product • Central data storage not ready : local RIS server required (provided by LSP) • N3 links to satellite units …..etc

  17. “Go-live” – Saturday 16th July 2005 Were all our ducks in a row? – we weren’t sure

  18. “Go Live” – what happened next ? “Fat man in a canoe”

  19. “Go Live” – what happened next ? • ↑ plain film workload • ↓ efficiency • myriad process issues • request forms not scanned • often no images in PACS • images on worklists when no report required • felt like meltdown just around the corner

  20. Issues emerging after “go-live” • Business processes/continuity/development • Training too little, too late, not “joined-up” • Technical loss of extend from RIS to PACS

  21. Then what happened ? • All day visit from FJA/GE/HSS • Action plan to address technical/support/process/training issues • Slow steady improvement now being seen • Clinical benefits within department beginning to be realised

  22. Clinical Reporting Pre-PACS/RIS • Attendance registered on RIS • Hardcopy film from current examination • Old films retrieved and matched • Films and request form to Consultant for tape reporting • Transcription and typed report production • Printed report despatched to referrer

  23. Clinical Reporting post-PACS/RIS • Reporting driven by worklists created in RIS • Worklists may be generic/modality-specific/named/other • Request Card scanned into RIS when examination booked in. • Images open in PACS and scanned request form is simultaneously visible in RIS • Lost film/request forms no longer a problem

  24. Benefits • Increased productivity in plain film reporting sessions • Improved report turnaround times • More timely/relevant clinical reporting • More efficient clinico-radiological consultation • Improved running of MDT’s • Reduced clinical risk • Increased professional satisfaction

  25. Accommodation : Changes • Created dedicated reporting room from 2 existing Consultant offices • 4 screened-off reporting workstations • Air-conditioned • Blacked-out • Quiet • ↓ coefficient of interruption

  26. Workflow : changes • Developing Duty Radiologist to deal with general enquiries/troubleshooting • Separate this role from plain film reporting function to maximize governance/productivity benefits • Flexible rostering of consultant time to match capacity and demand better

  27. Where do we go from here? • Build on existing achievements • Introduction of voice recognition technology • Work towards paperless imaging service (Ordercomms planned for Autumn 2006)

  28. Salisbury District Hospital : 4 months on • Basically sound technology but still suffering regular loss of extend from RIS to PACS • Local RIS data storage • Still dependent on CD for image transfer between SDH and satellite units • Issues around image transfer to tertiary care

  29. If we had to do it all again…… NATIONAL PROGRAMME ISSUES • seek clearer understanding of the contract, both in terms of equipment and business development support • better training : ours has been inadequate with no single agent responsible for the integrated PACS/RIS product • central RIS data storage: will it be achieved

  30. If we had to do it all again…… NATIONAL PROGRAMME ISSUES • Helpdesk support : cumbersome for non-technical issues • N3 • Information Governance strategy • Are the suppliers up to it on a national scale?

  31. If we had to do it all again……. LOCALITY ISSUES(1) • Implement RIS first followed by PACS 2-3 months later • Have a dummy PACS/RIS system for training at least 1 month before go-live • If not available under contract, should have Business Process Re-engineering advisors for Radiology and other clinical areas

  32. If we had to do it all again……. LOCALITY ISSUES(2) • Consider every aspect of life without the brown packet, including image transfer to/from other organisations • Sufficient resources/time for training • Realistic assessment of how much time all this requires, esp clinical leads

  33. Where is the life We have lost in living? Where is the wisdom We have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge We have lost in information? TS Eliot Choruses form “The Rock”

More Related