PubMed · 9386366
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R Haugh. 1997-11-20. Group purchasing. A lock on loyalty.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9386366/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
In this paper, a range of issues influencing and affecting NHS information governance policy and practice will be considered. The expansion of electronic information services within the NHS and with its other information partners has reinforced the need for effective security and confidentiality arrangements to apply at multiple levels and in a variety of different business contexts. Added to these, the need to consistently address issues of data protection, records management and data quality, has resulted in a NHS information governance initiative. This initiative is intended to provide approved tools, methods and guidance that may be applied consistently throughout the NHS and that will be underpinned through appropriate support and helpdesk services. This paper emphasises the need to consider a range of applicable topics when determining a responsible and extensible approach to the governance of information collected, used and shared by healthcare organisations.
This article describes an application for capturing, delivering, and tracking urgent radiology exam results. Urgent exam findings are entered using a Web form embedded within the Picture archiving and communication system (PACS) display station. The findings are then accessible via soft copy using the PACS display stations, hospital information system (HIS) terminals, or wireless-enabled personal digital assistants (PDAs) or via hard copy printouts that are generated automatically or on demand. Additionally, quality control is performed on those findings entered by radiology residents and fellows, the results of which are used for both performance tracking and educational activities. The application was developed using Sun Microsystems' Java programming language. The Java Message Service (JMS) was used to manage the delivery of findings. JMS provides a robust, flexible framework for exchanging messages between disparate applications. The application is now used for all urgent exams; completely replacing the original paper-based system. The use of JMS provides the necessary level of reliability needed by this application.
The methodology and outcome of a hands-on workshop for the evaluation of PACS (picture archiving and communication system) software for a multihospital PACS project are described. The following radiological workstations and web-browser-based image distribution software clients were evaluated as part of a multistep evaluation of PACS vendors in March 2001: Impax DS 3000 V 4.1/Impax Web1000 (Agfa-Gevaert, Mortsel, Belgium); PathSpeed V 8.0/PathSpeed Web (GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, Wis., USA); ID Report/ID Web (Image Devices, Idstein, Germany); EasyVision DX/EasyWeb (Philips Medical Systems, Eindhoven, Netherlands); and MagicView 1000 VB33a/MagicWeb (Siemens Medical Systems, Erlangen, Germany). A set of anonymized DICOM test data was provided to enable direct image comparison. Radiologists ( n=44) evaluated the radiological workstations and nonradiologists ( n=53) evaluated the image distribution software clients using different questionnaires. One vendor was not able to import the provided DICOM data set. Another vendor had problems in displaying imported cross-sectional studies in the correct stack order. Three vendors (Agfa-Gevaert, GE, Philips) presented server-client solutions with web access. Two (Siemens, Image Devices) presented stand-alone solutions. The highest scores in the class of radiological workstations were achieved by ID Report from Image Devices ( p<0.005). In the class of image distribution clients, the differences were statistically not significant. Questionnaire-based evaluation was shown to be useful for guaranteeing systematic assessment. The workshop was a great success in raising interest in the PACS project in a large group of future clinical users. The methodology used in the present study may be useful for other hospitals evaluating PACS.