-
Fuji 5, Epic Radiant, and PS One
Our 22-man radiology practice is getting ready to make the transition to voice recognition. Yes, that’s correct, we still use human transcriptionists in 2020 and they are great. I am one of the older members of the practice and have never had to use VR for daily work Many of the new younger members have only used VR and are amazed at how much more productive can be, and attentive they are to the images, using human transcription. And of course, the accuracy is still better as well.
In any case, we are going to be making a transition to Fuji 5, Epic Radiant, and Power Scribe One the newest available version in December. I have been promised by Nuance that we will be more productive than we are currently. Much less talking required for routine normal studies. I’m quite afraid theyre serving me Kool-Aid.
We are currently building templates for every exam in our chargemaster. In doing so, we want to put in comparison dates of prior examinations automatically. We are going to use a PACS driven workflow. Fuji will open the current exam and display the priors. We want the dates of the prior examinations to automatically populate into the report and are being told this cannot be done. Has anyone seen a way of solving this problem? I would also be interested in any comments anyone might have about this combination of products.
Sincerely,
Fearful New VR User
-
1 Reply
-
The data that drives your Powerscribe templates is coming via HL7 from your RIS (EPIC Radiant). When you launch the target study in the viewer, Fuji passes the linking ID (Accession and Patient #) to Powerscribe, which then matches the study description and other demographics received from EPIC and loads your template. This is typically done once when the study is initially loaded.
Powerscribe doesn’t know which prior to load because that logic is sitting in Fuji and Fuji either doesn’t know which prior will be loaded when initially launching PS or doesnt have the ability to pass the relevant prior info during the launch call
When thinking about this problem, ask yourself whether you truly want this automated. How often is the most relevant prior (the one you want to reference in the report) actually pre-hung by the viewer software? I have observed many Radiologists flicking through the priors jacket looking for relevant studies because a) the priors logic in the viewer is rudimentary, b) no two radiologists can agree on relevance, c) priors data is horribly inconsistent, or d) you never quite know if the chest CT demonstrates something interesting about the upper abdomen.
Good luck on your journey.
