Most PACS vendors support Enterprise VNA. Ensure that Trusts specify correctly to ensure they are standards based & critically---they supports standard document storage & XDS indexing--just DICOM is inadequate--for an enterprise strategy.
posted on Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - 09:58 am
Dear Neelam I have written about this with several published articles as an independent. If you go to our web site there are several documents relating to the subject of VNA and the true meaning of it. We are working with several Trusts through their replacement procurement to ensure that a true VNA is provided to ensure the ability of good cross data sharing using the IHE profiles. As we are part of the IHE group we want to ensure that the standards we discuss can be put into action in the real world. Our web site is www.pfcl.co.uk. Some were published in Rad Magazine. Chris Bull
Thanks Chris. Yes, I agree you have been promoting this concept for a while. The links I put were the first to come up with the key words I used "Enterprise XDS VNA".
In the aftermath of LSP failure to deliver a EPR to NHS, and the PACS replacements on the horizon, here is an opportunity that we as a community have--by the term community I would include us the users, RIS suppliers, PACS suppliers, & VNA suppliers have to lead the informatics world in the UK. However, what we all need to agree to are 3 fundamental concepts 1. A document standard--HL7 CDA 2. Common metadata for indexing standard-XDS/XDS-I 3. Common document & image sharing protocols--XDR/XDR-I What is really re-assuring is that GE, Fujifilm, Agfa, Sectra, Phillips, Merge etc all major PACS are supporting XDS VNA concepts. Similarly renowned VNA vendors like Acuo, Bridgehead etc are supporting XDS. Rogan, Forecare, Karoshealth have been supporters of XDS concepts for a while now. IBM, Dell, Cannon are all entering into the Enterprise VNA marketplace. At the Autumn Meeting, we will discuss both Enterprise VNA concepts & also document standards. We will deal with procurement of VNA. For our local procurement, we put VNA as a requirement for PACS replacement.
posted on Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - 10:36 pm
Dear Neelam The real key to the success of the projects we are involved with is the ability to be able to data share with other Trusts using the open and IHE profiles. We have put together a series of tender documents for these Trusts we are helping with their procurement and to ensure clear understanding of what is required in a VNA, enterprise or not. The contracts will be written to ensure compliance. Hopefully it will be better than the mess we now having to unravel as we try to migrate data from the older LSP systems. For further help or information on tender documents etc. please check our web site or contact me. I am still very suspicious of the main PACS vendors calming to have a true VNA supporting the open standards and the required IHE profiles and the commitment to add new ones as they are released. Chris Bull
posted on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - 01:15 pm
Modality vendors via adoption of DICOM led to the most successful global IT system--PACS. This is dependent on collaboration of vendors using the common interoperability standard of DICOM. PACS vendors are aware that commercial success does lie with vendor neutrality & open standards.
I do believe PACS vendors can be the leaders for Enterprise VNA concepts, and provide the added value to the currently happening PACS replacements--by adopting XDS, CDA & XDR.
VNA can be used for a single enterprise (we have gone for that approach at Doncaster) but similarly multiple Trusts can have a single PACS & VNA if they choose.
Enterprise VNA concepts will be discussed on the 6th Nov.
posted on Monday, October 22, 2012 - 11:15 am
Dear Neelam I would agree with the adoption of DICOM as I was working for one the companies who brought about this standard due to the requirement for image printing and the original form of data sharing. There were a lot of the OEM whose DICOM was not conformant and we worked with the users to ensure that they understood what was required with expert assistance. With phrases like: ‘All DICOM conformance stated is assumed purchased and enabled’. This ensures that most of the DICOM conformance should be available as stated. Still a useful phrase to put in tenders today. As for the VNAs, what we are seeing is that a lot of PACS suppliers are quoting for this but there is no change in their offering other than the use of the phrase. A true VNA allows the PACS to become a modality which may be not linked to the PACS vendor. As we are involved with some Trusts with their replacement program tenders we are seeing the adoption of the ‘best of breed’ offerings being made by leading suppliers. This is supplying a separate RIS and true VNAs to meet the requirements being made by these Trusts supported by consultancy experts in this field, PF being one. The use of XDS etc. is still in its infancy but it is in the interest of the true VNA suppliers to ensure that they keep up with the changing profiles as they are released to market as this is the core of their business. My advice , get expert help in this area as you will have to live with any mistake for at least 5 years!! Looking forward to the meeting on the 6th November 2012.
"A true VNA allows the PACS to become a modality which may be not linked to the PACS vendor." I would agree that principles are similar--I would say to say PACS will become "modality like".
However, it is still possible to have a GE CT scanner & GE PACS, Agfa CR & Agfa PACS, Fujifilm CR Fujifilm PACS, Phillips US & Phillips PACS etc or alternatively have a non-modality vendor be the PACS suppliers--Sectra, McKesson etc Both types of suppliers exist & work well for customers.
Similarly I think there is room for many types of suppliers for Enterprise VNA 1. VNA vendors who also sell PACS 2. VNA vendors who also sell RIS 3. VNA vendors who do not sell PACS or RIS.
If customers simply insist on standards & dont get their judgement clouded by whether the same vendor suppliers PACS, RIS or not, I think we will be fine.