PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2195656

Nuclear medicine information management systems.

Abstract

There are good arguments for considering a computer system to improve timeliness and quality of patient care, enhance the format of clinical reports, and strengthen management controls for the containment of health care costs. A nuclear medicine information management system serves to fill these needs. Receptionists access the system to schedule patient studies, log patient data, and generate examination records. Secretaries transcribe and print clinical reports. Film library staff locate patient films and keep track of borrowed studies. Technologists produce study work sheets, record quality assurance information, and process the examination results. Staff preparing radiopharmaceuticals use the system to receive and inventory tracer stocks, track preparation and dispensing activities, and to keep records for external review. Clinicians use it to look up old study results and record their study impressions. Managers access statistical reports, billing information, and resource utilization data. This review describes an information management system as implemented in a nuclear medicine clinic. Software applications for patient scheduling, radiopharmacy, film management, report generation, quality assurance, and inventory control are described as implemented on a variety of academic and commercial systems. Hardware architectures and the issues surrounding system specification and installation are explored.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B R Line. 1990. Nuclear medicine information management systems.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-2998(05)80033-9

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Establishment of a stroke unit in a district hospital: review of experience.

BACKGROUND: The experience and outcomes of co-locating acute stroke and stroke rehabilitation care in a district hospital were reviewed. METHOD: Information for patients admitted to Blacktown and Mt Druitt Hospitals before and after setting up an acute stroke unit (SU) (12 months data for each period), including mortality and length of stay (LOS) at the hospital were obtained from various sources, including the diagnosis-related group and subacute and non-acute casemix databases. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction of mortality (18 vs 10%; P = 0.01) and reduced total LOS (46 vs 39 days; P = 0.01) with similar functional outcomes in the post-SU period. Fifty per cent of patients were unable to access the acute SU. Patients admitted into the SU had lower mortality (5 vs 14%; P = 0.01) and were also discharged from hospital earlier (35 vs 54 days; P = 0.01) than patients admitted into general wards during the post-SU period. Thirty-four per cent of patients received rehabilitation within the rehabilitation facility in the post-SU period compared with 19% in the pre-SU period. CONCLUSION: The Blacktown experience showed the feasibility of establishing a co-located SU within rehabilitation facility with good outcomes as illustrated by the significant reduction in the stroke mortality, a reduction in the total LOS and an increase in the number of patients receiving rehabilitation post-stroke.

Hospital Departments↗