What’s in a name? Quite a bit actually. The art of word-smithing is alive and well at some of the largest PACS companies. Several major PACS vendors have recently announced their “Enterprise Archive” and proclaim them to be “multi-department image repositories” and “platforms for application-neutral image management”.
Sounds a lot like the concept of PACS-Neutral Enterprise Archive, but are these new Enterprise Archives really “PACS-Neutral”?
Over the last few years, most of the major Radiology PACS vendors have acquired Cardiology PACS solutions by acquiring the companies that developed those Cardiology systems. Unfortunately the acquired technology was frequently different than the company’s existing technology, whether that was different OS, different directory database, different file structure, different programming language. This is a major reason why so many Radiology and Cardiology PACS today stand separate, each with their separate silos of information. So a major effort underway at the major PACS companies has been to “integrate” their Radiology and Cardiology PACS into a single platform, at least a single, shared long-term archive. (A single shared directory database would be an even better solution.) Now it is apparent some of the major PACS companies have finally succeeded in integrating their Radiology PACS and their Cardiology PACS into this single, ideal data management system, and the result is being promoted as “Enterprise Archive”.
Their concept of an “Enterprise Archive” is a significant improvement, but it doesn’t go far enough.
While the major PACS vendors were busy figuring out how to integrate their own PACS products into their own single, shared archive, a number of smaller more innovative companies were busy figuring out how to bring disparate PACS into a shared long-term data management system. It seemed to the innovators that developing the technology to interconnect multiple PACS from different vendors would address a much larger problem, a problem that is far more representative of the real market.
There is nothing wrong with developing a technology and a marketing strategy that encourages Health Systems to invest in department PACS from the same vendor. It’s just that at the end of the day (more realistically the end of five years), all those TeraBytes of data are still in a file format somewhat proprietary to that vendor. And all the waving of the DICOM and IHE flags isn’t going to eliminate the need to migrate that data to the next archive, should the Health System decide to switch vendors at some future date.
Despite such interesting examples of word-smithing as “application-neutral image management”, the majority of this new breed of “Enterprise Archive” are not what is meant by “PACS-Neutral Enterprise Archive”. Those archives are not capable of the high degree of interoperability (data exchange) with PACS from other vendors. They are not capable of fixing the numerous DICOM sins that are firmly entrenched in the installed base, sins that limit our ability to effectively exchange data between departments and between organizations.
While the major PACS vendors were busy integrating their own PACS into their own Enterprise Archive, a market has emerged for the PACS-Neutral Enterprise Archive. The former is just the latest incarnation of the vendor’s proprietary database, and the later is the multi-vendor and (finally) portable database that today’s market really needs. And the big guys can’t catch up by simply word-smithing their marketing pieces in an attempt to hijack the better idea.
You don’t need a complicated RFP to drill down past the word-smithing and get to the truth of the matter. Two simple and reasonably straightforward questions, if answered by the vendor truthfully, will separate what we mean by PACS-Neutral Enterprise Archive from what the major vendors are calling their Enterprise Archive.
Question#1: Is your proposed archiving system capable of Dynamic Tag Morphing? Minimum functionality of Dynamic Tag Morphing refers to the ability to reference an internal library of PACS-specific Tag addresses (Group, Element) and Attributes (VR, VM), during the Archive’s internal process of modifying a DICOM Header in near-real-time when transmitting DICOM image data acquired on one system but destined for another.
Question #2: Does your Dynamic Tag Morphing application allow for the definition of rules around how Tags should be statically modified, typically based upon Boolean logic. For example, if data originated at a specific facility using PACS A, is of a specific type, and is destined for another specific facility using PACS B, the archive should be able to dynamically modify any DICOM header values based upon static rules or a data source lookup (for example changing patient ID, Study Description, or Accession Number) to enable full utilization of the data by PACS B.
If you are having difficulty getting past the word-smithing, Gray Consulting has developed a useful and inexpensive Educational Program designed to introduce you and your organization to the subject of PACS-Neutral Archive. The program consists of a 90 minute Webinar hosted by Michael Gray and based on PowerPoint slides, and a very inclusive 4-page list of Features and Functions that define the PACS-Neutral Archive. Contact Gray Consulting at graycons@well.com for more information and a quote for the Educational Program.