[PACS: acceptance by orthopedic surgeons].
OBJECTIVE
The goal of the study was to evaluate the acceptance of a web-based picture archiving and communication system (PACS) by orthopedic surgeons 1 year after implementation.


METHODS
One year after the implementation of a web-based PACS all physicians were surveyed with a standardized questionnaire. Questions included: speed of PACS, quality of clinicoradiological meetings, quality of monitors, PACS training, and performance. Data were evaluated separately for the Department of Orthopedic Surgery and the reference group of all other physicians.


RESULTS
Among the respondents, 92% of the orthopedic surgeons stated there was a reduction of time required to receive images, and 64% concluded that patient care was faster. Archived images were received in less than 5 min in 82% after PACS and in 8% before PACS. The clinicoradiological meetings improved with PACS in 100% due to beamer presentation. All would recommend a PACS. The equipment to view images in the operating theater was assessed as being good or very good by 83%; monitor quality was judged better for the outpatient clinics (100% good or very good). Conventional radiograms were missed at the ward rounds by 56%. Training for PACS was considered sufficient by 67%, and 15% asked for refresher courses. In the reference group 60% asked for refresher courses. In the comparison of orthopedic surgeons with the reference group PACS was judged better especially concerning the viewing software and quality of monitors.


CONCLUSIONS
There is an over all acceptance of PACS by physicians outside the radiology department. The availability of images was not only facilitated it was faster as well. However, the quality of monitors in the operating theater should be improved. To achieve sustained success of PACS consistent training on PACS and its features is necessary. Conventional radiograms were often missed at the ward rounds.
Lenhart
M
M
Klinik für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, Buger Straße 80, 96049 Bamberg, Deutschland. markus.lenhart@sozialstiftung-bamberg.de
Haueis
A
A
Schneider
H
H
Jung
E-M
EM
Herold
T
T
Feuerbach
S
S
Schöffl
V
V
Zorger
N
N
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D005858:Germany; D009985:Orthopedics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D010820:Physicians / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians' / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011873:Radiology Information Systems / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D000078329:Workforce
Radiologe. 2002 May;42(5):351-60
12132122
Rofo. 1998 Oct;169(4):412-9
9819656
Rofo. 1999 Jul;171(1):1-2
10464497
Rofo. 2003 Jun;175(6):849-54
12811700
Radiologe. 2002 Feb;42(2):119-24
11963246
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2007 Mar 2;132(9):453-7
17315124
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2002 Apr 26;127(17):907-12
12148344
Rofo. 2003 Dec;175(12):1627-33
14661132
Radiologe. 1999 Apr;39(4):260-8
10337694
Acta Radiol. 2000 Jan;41(1):106-10
10665883
Rofo. 2003 Jul;175(7):973-80
12847654
Rofo. 2003 Oct;175(10):1309-16
14556098
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Apr;176(4):861-4
11264065
Rofo. 2006 Jun;178(6):575-7
16703492
J Digit Imaging. 2006;19 Suppl 1:18-28
16955380
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2006 May 12;131(19):1091-9; quiz 1101-2
16685631
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Mar;178(3):563-6
11856674
J Digit Imaging. 2006;19 Suppl 1:44-51
16763930
Radiologe. 2002 May;42(5):344-50
12132121
Rofo. 2007 Feb;179(2):160-5
17262243
J Digit Imaging. 2006;19 Suppl 1:66-71
16946989
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Jul;179(1):33-7
12076899