My feeling is it depends on the situation.
In an acute situation (injury with possible fracture or unwell person
with possible pneumonia)- then I want images (preferably films for now,
as I don't have a high resolution monitor) to look at immediately.
For the less urgent situations, I mainly want a quality report that
addresses the questions I raised in the clinical notes section of the
request. If those questions weren't addressed, then I may want to view
the images to see if I can answer those questions by my interpretation
of the images, or decide whether to ask for a further report from the
radiologist. Sometimes I may want to view the images to see an unusual
or unexpected report. In these situations, I, like Les, think there
should be a web link to the images. This web link should be within the
report and a single click should be all that is required. It should be
independent of the clinical software used. It needs to be secure at both
ends (one radiology company has asked us to open ports on our firewall
to allow us to view their images). The image should be linked to other
images for that patient for comparison (and have reports attached).
When referring patients to specialists, it would be useful to be able to
point the specialist to the web link and they could then view it with
their computer (chuckle,chuckle).
I have looked at one CD once at found it too cumbersome to navigate and
never tried again.
Regards
Rob Hosking
GP Bacchus Marsh, Vic

Peter MacIsaac wrote:

>Peter, 
>
>Not suggesting we should get the report on CD (but if there is a set of
>images on the CD so should the report be also!)
>
>This is about what do different groups of doctors expect in relation to DI
>images.
>
>1.  Who looks at the films patients bring in?
>
>2.  Who struggles with trying to interpret the image in the consultation and
>would like an example image (even with an arrow pointing to pathology if not
>clearly obvious) - perhaps one or two representative low resolution images
>attached to the electronic report or accessible via URL?
>
>3. Who would really like a full DICOM image so that they can view it on a
>high res. Monitor, play with the contrast etc and see what the radiologist
>can see. - report quality
>
>Clearly there will be some situations where all of the above are required.
>Just trying to get a sense of what most GPs want in the first instance and
>also whether the CD images sent by DI practices are useful or better used as
>"drink coasters"
>
>
>Regards
>
>Peter MacIsaac
>MacIsaac Informatics
>
>Consulting in Health Informatics, Terminology & Data management and Health
>Policy.
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>
>0411403462 (mobile)
>61611327 (office)
>peter_macisaac (skype)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>On Behalf Of Peter Machell
>Sent: Saturday, 8 April 2006 11:25 PM
>To: General Practice Computing Group Talk
>Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Using Radiology Image CDs as drink coasters
>
>Using CDs is a step backwards from electronically delivered results.  
>Any computer component with moving parts will be phased out within a  
>few short years.
>
>Peter.
>_______________________________________________
>Gpcg_talk mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gpcg_talk mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
>
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to