PubMed · 3107743
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
A N Hamlyn. 1987-05-02. Case notes chaos.. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.294.6580.1161
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
One of the advantages that a picture archiving and communications system (PACS) is supposed to provide over a film-based operation is improved performance in retrieving images. Although it seems self-evident that this should be so, this experiment was intended to verify this and to provide some time comparisons for the two methods. The experiment consisted of randomly selecting ultrasound and computed tomography cases and determining how long it took to retrieve files at a PACS workstation or in person from the file room. To simulate actual retrieval volumes, a total of 40 cases from current to 6 months old, 20 cases from the past year, and 10 cases more than 1 year old was selected. Results indicate that PACS retrieval can indeed be faster than file room retrieval. However, the difference is less for recent cases than for older cases. For cases 6 or fewer months old, the workstation retrieval was approximately 2.5 minutes faster per case than the film file room. This time difference increased markedly when extended to the 1-year and older-than-1-year groups. This report details the results of this study and provides information about the reliability of the two archives.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.