Determining the Effect of the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) on Different Dimensions of Users' Work.

Mahdieh Montazeri, Reza Khajouei
Author Information
  1. Mahdieh Montazeri: Department of Health Information Sciences, Faculty of Management and Medical Information Sciences, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran. ORCID
  2. Reza Khajouei: Department of Health Information Sciences, Faculty of Management and Medical Information Sciences, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran. ORCID

Abstract

The impact of the picture archiving and communication system (PACS) on healthcare costs, information access, image quality, and user workflow has been well studied. However, there is insufficient evidence on the effect of this system on different dimensions of the users' work. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the PACS on different dimensions of users' work (external communication, service quality, user intention to use the PACS, daily routine, and complaints on users) and to compare the opinions of different groups of users about the PACS. This study was performed on the PACS users ( = 72) at Kerman University of Medical Sciences, including radiologists, radiology staff, ward heads, and physicians. Data were collected using a questionnaire consisting of two parts: demographic information of the participants and 5-point Likert scale questions concerning the five dimensions of users' work. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, ANOVA, and Pearson's correlation coefficient statistical tests. The mean of scores given by the PACS users was 4.31 ± 0.86 for external communication, 4.18 ± 0.96 for user intention to use the PACS, 3.91 ± 0.7 for service quality, 3.16 ± 0.56 for daily routine, and 3.08 ± 1.05 for complaints on users. Radiologists and radiology staff had a more positive opinion about the PACS than other clinicians such as physicians ( < 0.01, CI = 95%). Factors such as user age ( < 0.01, CI = 95%), job ( < 0.001, CI = 95%), work experience ( < 0.001, CI = 95%), and PACS training method (=0.037, CI = 95%) were related to the impact of the PACS on different dimensions of users' work. This study showed that the PACS has a positive effect on different dimensions of users' work, especially on external communication, user intention to use the system, and service quality. It is recommended to implement PACSs in medical centers to support users' work and to maintain and strengthen the capabilities and functions of radiology departments.

References

  1. Health Manag Technol. 2012 May;33(5):16-7 [PMID: 22619816]
  2. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Jul-Aug;19(4):506-13 [PMID: 22323392]
  3. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012 May 28;12:44 [PMID: 22640490]
  4. Radiographics. 2018 Oct;38(6):1761-1772 [PMID: 30303805]
  5. J Am Coll Radiol. 2012 Aug;9(8):543-4 [PMID: 22863461]
  6. Spine Deform. 2013 Nov;1(6):412-418 [PMID: 27927366]
  7. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2010 Oct;22(8):681-7 [PMID: 20630722]
  8. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2009 Jul;39(4):711-8 [PMID: 19531396]
  9. J Digit Imaging. 2017 Oct;30(5):555-560 [PMID: 28116576]
  10. J Digit Imaging. 2006;19 Suppl 1:10-7 [PMID: 16763932]
  11. J Digit Imaging. 2007 Dec;20(4):411-21 [PMID: 17191101]
  12. Med Phys. 2012 Oct;39(10):6526 [PMID: 28525153]
  13. J Digit Imaging. 2007 Jun;20(2):140-8 [PMID: 17318704]
  14. Eur Radiol. 2000;10(8):1351-4 [PMID: 10939506]
  15. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Jun 05;5(6):e77 [PMID: 28583905]
  16. PLoS One. 2014 Jan 16;9(1):e77669 [PMID: 24454678]
  17. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Apr 08;21(4):e11604 [PMID: 30958272]
  18. Radiographics. 2004 May-Jun;24(3):897-909 [PMID: 15143239]
  19. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2010 Feb;20(1):2-5 [PMID: 20351983]
  20. JMIR Med Inform. 2016 Jun 15;4(2):e21 [PMID: 27307046]
  21. Eur J Radiol. 2011 May;78(2):253-8 [PMID: 20634012]
  22. Eur J Radiol. 1999 Nov;32(2):106-12 [PMID: 10628417]
  23. J Manag Med. 2002;16(2-3):199-205 [PMID: 12211345]
  24. Int J Med Inform. 2008 Dec;77(12):836-47 [PMID: 18620903]
  25. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2016 Mar-Apr;45(2):101-6 [PMID: 26122926]
  26. Injury. 2011 Apr;42(4):339-42 [PMID: 20206348]
  27. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Aug 5;20(1):180 [PMID: 32758220]
  28. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Feb 08;7(2):e12658 [PMID: 30735147]
  29. Rofo. 2006 Apr;178(4):400-9 [PMID: 16607588]
  30. Indian J Surg. 2015 Dec;77(Suppl 3):774-7 [PMID: 27011455]
  31. Invest Radiol. 1988 Oct;23(10):707-12 [PMID: 3192392]
  32. J Infect Public Health. 2016 Nov - Dec;9(6):713-724 [PMID: 27659113]
  33. Int J Med Inform. 2007 Jan;76(1):22-33 [PMID: 16478675]
  34. J Biomed Inform. 2010 Feb;43(1):159-72 [PMID: 19615467]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0PACSworkusers'userdifferentdimensionsusersCI = 95%communicationquality<0impactsystemstudyexternalserviceintentionuseradiology3informationeffectdailyroutinecomplaintsstaffphysiciansDatausing4positive01001picturearchivinghealthcarecostsaccessimageworkflowwellstudiedHoweverinsufficientevidenceobjectiveevaluatecompareopinionsgroupsperformed = 72KermanUniversityMedicalSciencesincludingradiologistswardheadscollectedquestionnaireconsistingtwoparts:demographicparticipants5-pointLikertscalequestionsconcerningfiveanalyzeddescriptivestatisticsANOVAPearson'scorrelationcoefficientstatisticaltestsmeanscoresgiven31 ± 08618 ± 09691 ± 0716 ± 05608 ± 105RadiologistsopinioncliniciansFactorsagejobexperiencetrainingmethod=0037relatedshowedespeciallyrecommendedimplementPACSsmedicalcenterssupportmaintainstrengthencapabilitiesfunctionsdepartmentsDeterminingEffectPictureArchivingCommunicationSystemDifferentDimensionsUsers'Work

Similar Articles

Cited By