Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Large PACS projects

  • Chapter
Digital (R)Evolution in Radiology

  • 196 Accesses

Abstract

The first prototype PACS were installed in the late 1980s. These systems were mainly in house solutions established according to the local needs of the department and in close collaboration with a limited number of vendors like AT & T/Phillips, Vortech or Siemens [7]. Only a few dozen of these 1st generation systems were ever installed and almost none are still in active use, but the experience gained with these systems provided the basis for the next generation of PACS. These 2nd generation systems were installed by various manufacturers like Loral/ Siemens (now GE Medical Systems), Kodak, Siemens Medical Systems and AGFA among others. One typical feature of these systems was the use of standard computer hardware and standardised transmission protocols. Companies started to adhere to the ACR-NEMA and upcoming DICOM standard to allow for a higher level of interoperability with modalities, but still these systems allowed only for basic HIS/RIS-integration, limited network printing and used mostly proprietary solutions concerning their internal aspects. Some of these installations like the Hammersmith PACS in the United Kingdom [29,30], the Baltimore Veterans Affairs Medical Centre in the United States [28], the Hokkaido University Hospital in Japan [16] or the SMZO in Vienna [14] for example were quite successful pioneers in the field and a lot of them are still in use [3].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arenson RL, Chakraborty DP, Seshadri SB et al (1990) The digital image workstation. Radiology 176: 303315

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barneveld Binkhuysen FH (1992) Required fuctionality of PACS from clinical point of view. Int J Biomed Comput 30: 187–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bauman RA, Gell G, Dwyer SJ III (1996) Large picture archiving and communication systems of the world. Part 1. J Digit Imaging 9: 99–103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Blaine GJ, Cox JR, Jost RG (1996) Networks for electronic radiology. The Radiologic Clinics of North America 34 (3): 505–524

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Breant CM, Taira RK, Huang HK (1993) Interfacing aspects between picture archiving and communication systems, radiology information systems and hospital information systems. J Digit Imaging 6: 88–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan HP, Vyborny CJ, MacMahon H et al (1987) Digital mammography: ROC studies of the effect of pixel size and unsharp mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications. Invest Radiol 22: 573–576

    Google Scholar 

  7. Craig O (1993) Picture archiving and communication systems (PACS), modern technology and universal health needs. In: Lemke HU, Inamura K, Jaffe CC, Felix R (eds) Computer assisted radiology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 9–18

    Google Scholar 

  8. Digital Imaging Communication in Medicine (DICOM), NEMA Standards Publication PS 3 (1997) National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2101 L Street, NW, Washington DC 20037

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fuhrmann CR, Gur D, Good BC et al (1988) Storage phosphor radiographs versus conventional film: Interpreters perceptions of diagnostic quality. Am J Roentgenol 150: 1011–1014

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fuhrmann CR, Gur D, Schaetzing R (1990) High resolution digital imaging with storage phosphors. J Thoracic Imaging 5: 21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Garfagni H, Klipfel B (1995) Integrating HIS and PACS: The DICOM solution. In: Lemke HU, Inamura K, Jaffe CC, Vannier MW (eds) Computer assisted radiology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 1287–1288

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gur D, Fuhrmann CR, Thaete FL (1993) Computers for clinical practice and education in radiology. Radiographics 13: 457–460

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Horii SC, Horii HN, Mun SK et al (1989) Environmental design for reading from imaging workstations: ergonomic and architectural features. J Digit Imaging 2: 156–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hruby W, Moser H, Urban M et al (1992) The vienna SMZO PACS project: the totally digital hospital. Eur J Radiol 16: 66–68

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. IEEE Standard 830–1998 Recommended practice for software requirements specifications

    Google Scholar 

  16. Irie G, Miyasaka K, Miyamoto K et al (1990) PACS experience at the University of Hokkaido Medical School. Proc SPIE 1234: 26–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kasaday LR (1986) Human factor considerations in PACS design. Proc SPIE 626: 581–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. König H, Klose KJ (1999) Anforderungsdefinition und spezifikation für PAC-Systeme. Ein Leistungsverzeichnis in Anlehnung an den Standard “IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications”. Radiologe 39: 269–275

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meyer-Ebrecht D (1993) Digital image communication. Eur J Radiol 17: 47–55

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Meyer-Ebrecht D (1994) Picture archiving and communication systems for medical application. Int J Biomed Comput 35: 91–124

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mildenberger P, Jensch P (1999) Verwendung des DICOM-Standard in heterogener Umgebung. Inkompatibilität oder Interoperabilität. Radiologe 39: 282285

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nissen Meyer SA, Fink U, Pleier M, Becker C (1996) The full scale PACS-archive. A prerequisite for the filmless hospital. Acta Radiol 37: 838–846

    Google Scholar 

  23. Peer S, Vogl R, Seykora P et al (1998) Erste Erfahrungen mit dem unfallradiologischen PACS-Projekt an der Innsbrucker Universitätsklinik für Radiodiagnostik. Fortschr Röntgenstr 169: 459–464

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Peer S, Vogl R, Peer R et al (1999) Sophisticated HIS RIS PACS integration in a large scale traumatology PACS. J Digit Imaging 12: 99–102

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Redfern R, Horii SC, Feingold E et al (1999) Experience with radiology workflow and PACS: effects on technologist and radiologist task times. Proc SPIE 3662: 307–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rogerts DC, Johnson RE, Brenton B et al (1985) Predicting PACS console requirements from radiologists reading habits. Proc SPIE 536: 88–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schneider RH (1982) The role of standards in the development of systems for communicating and archiving medical images. Proc SPIE 2163: 270–271

    Google Scholar 

  28. Siegel EL (1994) PACS at the Baltimore Veterans Affaires Medical Centre Planning implementation strategies and preliminary experience. Proceedings of the Korean Society of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems: pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  29. Strickland NH (1995) Default display arrangements of images on PACS monitors. Br J Radiol 68: 252–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Strickland NH (1996) Review article: some cost benefit considerations for PACS: a radiological perspective. Br J Radiol 69: 1089–1098

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Washowich TL, Williams SC, Richardson LA, Simmons GE, Dao NV, Allen TW, Hammet GC, Morris MJ (1997) Detection of interstitial lung abnormalities on picture archiving and communication system video monitors. J Digit Imaging 10: 34–39

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    S. Peer, R. Peer & W. Jaschke

Authors
  1. S. Peer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Peer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. W. Jaschke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Danube Hospital, Vienna, Austria

    Walter Hruby (Chairman) (Chairman)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Peer, S., Peer, R., Jaschke, W. (2001). Large PACS projects. In: Hruby, W. (eds) Digital (R)Evolution in Radiology. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-3707-9_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-3707-9_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7091-3709-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-3707-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation