[glizzamora_849]

Only thing I’ve heard of is not allowing usb drives that contain the images since they are a very easy source of virus infections.  Any reasoning given behind it?

[B120905697]

No reasoning I have heard…probably “overfear”.

[jonhanse_770]

I agree with Lorixrayer.
 
Flash drives are typically a no no because you dont know what else is on the drive. In theory the same can be said for created DVD’s as well- there can be more than just the images on there.
 
The best option is to have studies sent electronically if the PACS at the transmit side has that capability. Most do. Otherwise you can have it put on a flash drive and have IT validate it as safe and download the images to the PACS for you …but that is a royal PIA. 
 
PACSMan

[ruszja]

Because you know ‘compliance’…. and ‘its policy’. Also ‘its illegal’ and ‘you know Medicare rules’ and if that doesn’t help ‘the HIPPO law’.

Of course outside studies take up space. If it’s a good PACS it allows those studies to be set with a retention policy that deletes them without taking space in the archive.

[kcfahrbach]

Old school thinking to not allow outside imaging.  We have electronic connections via Ambra, LifeImage, Nuance, and Change Healthcare – and send/receive thousands upon thousands of exams.  Esp so in the case of a couple of nearby mammography sites that have closed, and we have absorbed many of their patients.  Without the outside priors, our radiologists would not accept the patients at our facility.
We recently started entering “Outside Imaging No Interpretation” (ex. CT Outside Imaging …, MR Outside Imaging …)orders in our RIS in order to tie the outside images to the patient jacket appropriately.  When the Outside No Interp order is placed in the RIS, it is auto-finalized with the following report text inserted:  “Images acquired from an outside facility for comparison purposes.  This order has been auto-finalized and does not contain a result.” 

[jonhanse_770]

Bat- Sounds like a good solution
fw- You keep taling like that and I may have to provide you with an honorary membership to MICA (Medical Imaging Cynics Association)
 
PACSMan

[kcfahrbach]

[;)][:D]

[dwinn5]

is there anything about Intelerad that doesn’t drive everyone crazy?
 
Maybe their support…because as far as I can tell it does not exist. 

[ruszja]

Quote from BAT PACS

We recently started entering “Outside Imaging No Interpretation” (ex. CT Outside Imaging …, MR Outside Imaging …)orders in our RIS in order to tie the outside images to the patient jacket appropriately.  When the Outside No Interp order is placed in the RIS, it is auto-finalized with the following report text inserted:  “Images acquired from an outside facility for comparison purposes.  This order has been auto-finalized and does not contain a result.” 

 
That’s the way to do it. If this is done with a study specific code, it can also built into the system that the outside exams are properly displayed as priors. We have patients that go back and forth with 3 different university systems for various types of tertiary care. They often have a mix of studies done at mecca and at our little hospital. Having the priors available is necessary to provide quality patient care. When encountering the kind of stuff I put in my first reply from unwilling administrators and IT personnel, the way to overcome this is under the quality angle. Oh, and asking them ‘show me the policy’ or ‘show me the law’.
 
I do prefer to have the report of the outside imaging available. Either scanned and attached as an image or as a Dicom results file that I can pull up.

[iva.marce.07]

Attaching a report to all outside studies being sent via DICOM c-move is a royal pain and rarely will office staff comply. The IHE profile PDI addresses the inclusion of the report with the images for CD’s etc, but not for DICOM c-move. Some PACS are now supporting it, but others (like my own Intelerad) doesn’t support this and it drives me crazy…