[Unknown Member]

I’ll preface by saying our PACS has a good system for creating HP’s.
The first problem really is with the modality vendors and the various series descriptions they provide. We have 10 MR units and 13 CT scanners in our system and even series descriptions from the same vendors vary. 
The PACS does have the ability to identify series based on the DICOM. Contrast vs non-contrast for example. The second problem we have is when the technologist chooses the wrong protocol and even though the series is clearly with contrast or without, the DICOM can have it wrong. 
So, yes HP’s are a constant pain with needing updates. 

[ruszja]

With fixing, do you refer to:
– having to re-hang stuff every time you open a study
– having to fix the actual HP so it hangs it correctly next time ?
 
The latter should be a one time thing for every scanner (or set of protocols) you encounter in your practice.
 
As the prior poster, biggest problem are different naming conventions across manufacturers (and at times the apps person who set up the scanner).
Second problem is heterogeneity across techs. Some take the protocol provided by the manufacturer and tweak it from there, others use the protocol from the site folder. Sometimes the same sequence has different names in both.
 
I’ll start worrying about AI taking my job once PACS manufacturers have figured out an automated way to identify T1/T2/STIR/pre/post and give me a consistent HP.

[kaldridgewv2211]

there’s a good amount of time that goes into making things better in DPs but we’re at the point where rads have shown off DPs to vendors as IP.