Migrating to the Modern PACS: Challenges and Opportunities

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2018180161

The technical and human factors of picture archiving and communications system (PACS) migrations are keys to success when undertaking system upgrades and replacements to improve the efficiency and functionality of a radiology department’s digital infrastructure.

With progressive advancements in picture archiving and communication system (PACS) technology, radiology practices frequently look toward system upgrades and replacements to further improve efficiency and capabilities. The transition between PACS has the potential to derail the operations of a radiology department. Careful planning and attention to detail from radiology informatics leaders are imperative to ensure a smooth transition. This article is a review of the architecture of a modern PACS, highlighting areas of recent innovation. Key considerations for planning a PACS migration and important issues to consider in data migration, change management, and business continuity are discussed. Beyond the technical aspects of a PACS migration, the human factors to consider when managing the cultural change that accompanies a new informatics tool and the keys to success when managing technical failures are explored.

Online supplemental material is available for this article.

©RSNA, 2018

References

  • 1. Huang HK. Short history of PACS part I: USA. Eur J Radiol 2011;78(2):163–176.
  • 2. Thrall JH. Teleradiology part I: history and clinical applications. Radiology 2007;243(3):613–617.
  • 3. Morgan MB, Meenan CD, Safdar NM, Nagy P, Flanders AE. Informatics leaders in radiology: who they are and why you need them. J Am Coll Radiol 2014;11(12 pt B):1241–1250.
  • 4. Erickson BJ. Evaluating a picture archiving communication system workstation. J Digit Imaging 1997;10(3 suppl 1): 12–13.
  • 5. Álvarez R, Legarreta JH, Kabongo L, Epelde G, Macía I. Towards a deconstructed PACS-as-a-service system. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018; 234–243.
  • 6. Geeslin MG, Gaskin CM. Electronic health record-driven workflow for diagnostic radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol 2016; 13(1):45–53.
  • 7. Agarwal TK, Sanjeev. Vendor neutral archive in PACS. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2012;22(4):242–245.
  • 8. Drnasin I, Grgić M, Gogić G. JavaScript access to DICOM network and objects in web browser. J Digit Imaging 2017;30 (5):537–546.
  • 9. Sim L. Budgeting for PACS. Biomed Imaging Interv J 2008; 4(4):e32.
  • 10. Khorasani R. You need a prenuptial agreement in your PACS contract: here is why. J Am Coll Radiol 2005;2(2):196–197.
  • 11. van Ooijen PM, Aryanto KY, Broekema A, Horii S. DICOM data migration for PACS transition: procedure and pitfalls. Int J CARS 2015;10(7):1055–1064.
  • 12. State MRL. Minimum medical record retention periods for records held by medical doctors and hospitals. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. https://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/appa7-1.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2018.
  • 13. Kotter JP. Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harv Bus Rev 2007;85(1):96–103.
  • 14. Edmondson AC. Strategies of learning from failure. Harv Bus Rev 2011;89(4):48–55, 137.
  • 15. Brook OR, O’Connell AM, Thornton E, Eisenberg RL, Mendiratta-Lala M, Kruskal JB. Quality initiatives: anatomy and pathophysiology of errors occurring in clinical radiology practice. RadioGraphics 2010;30(5):1401–1410.
  • 16. Abujudeh HH, Kaewlai R. Radiology failure mode and effect analysis: what is it? Radiology 2009;252(2):544–550.
  • 17. Thornton E, Brook OR, Mendiratta-Lala M, Hallett DT, Kruskal JB. Application of failure mode and effect analysis in a radiology department. RadioGraphics 2011;31(1):281–293.

Article History

Received: Apr 25 2018
Revision requested: June 5 2018
Revision received: July 9 2018
Accepted: July 13 2018
Published online: Oct 10 2018
Published in print: Oct 2018