JS PACS

...keeping you connected to your images.

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
jspacs.com

Hi-Resolution Monitors: Barco and Image Systems

E-mail Print PDF

It is that time again for Hi-Res Monitor replacement discussions between two highly competitive vendors.  After week long use of each of the monitors and competitive pricing, I am looking to the JS PACS community for other experiences with either of these vendors.  I am hoping to hear the good, bad and ugly of your experiences.

I personally like both monitors and each offers that latest array of fleet management along with remote calibration functionality and reporting tools.

As with anything, it is hard to gauge what a device will actually do until you have stressed the device for over a year or more, so I am hoping to engage all of you in a discussion of your experiences.

If you have used either Image Systems or Barco, please post your thoughts in the appropriate thread here.

As always, thanks for visiting JS PACS and being a part of the community.



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free Joomla PHP extensions, software, information and tutorials.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 11:58
 

Agfa HeartLab: Performance Issues or Normal Behavior?

E-mail Print PDF

 Typically don’t like to discuss vendor specific problems in front-page articles but I’m going to break that rule today.  I’m hoping that this article will reach many people but specifically cardiology PACS Administrators who are responsible for managing the Agfa HeartLab Cardiology PACS solution. I’m currently managing this specific C-PACS solution and find some recurring behaviors that are not only problematic but results in significant manual work to keep the system running in a usable state.

What has been occurring in my implementation is routine loss of the DICOM services.  If you’re familiar with Agfa as a cardiology solution, you’ll know that they run objects called DICOM labs.  Each DICOM Lab is responsible for image transfer of one particular imaging device.  We have customized HeartLab in that we don’t store directly to cardiology PACS but rather store directly to radiology PACS (which contains our enterprise archive) and then forward a copy to cardiology PACS for viewing.  Since we only have one device sending to the cardiology PACS we only have one DICOM lab and one would think that without the typical 10 or 15 DICOM labs running simultaneously we should be experiencing high levels of performance, but we are not.

The most frustrating problem I have with this system is that every so often (20 to 24 hours) DICOM services hang on the server.  There is really no indication that this services have hung other than the fact that an occasional spot check of our archive’s auto router shows anywhere from 1500 to 2000 images pending transfer to HeartLab.  Usually, simply logging onto the server in performing a stop and start of the DICOM services will kick start all of the processes back into motion.  Sometimes however, a complete reboot of the CPACS server is necessary.  While the resolution is quite manual, it is not overly lengthy but the fact that it has to occur every day is unacceptable.  From the time spent by the PACS administrator fixing the problem and time lost from the cardiologists who are waiting for these image transfers to take place, this cardiology solution significantly slows down workflow throughout the day.

I’m curious to know if any other cardiology PACS administrators experience similar issues, specifically with the Agfa solution and what types of resolutions you’ve developed to address the problem.  Join the discussion here.



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free Joomla PHP extensions, software, information and tutorials.
Last Updated on Friday, 22 May 2009 12:17
 

MedQuist SpeechQ: An implementation begins.

E-mail Print PDF

About to embark on an implementation of the MedQuist SpeechQ Voice Recognition Dictation product and in interesting in hear other views on how users of the same system felt that their implementation went.  Please join the discussion in the JS PACS Forum by clicking here.



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free Joomla PHP extensions, software, information and tutorials.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 11:31
 

Operating Systems

E-mail Print PDF

Operating Systems, which are also known by the acronym OS will be the next section of discussion in the IT Skills section.

Most people are familiar with the Microsoft Windows platform of computing however, not all PACS systems run on Windows. This is why, as a PACS Administrator, you will need to understand the different brands of systems.

The OS is the software on which any workstation, server, laptop PDA or other computing device can run. The OS is responsible for sharing and coordinating all of the hardware resources on the device and allowing them to talk to each other.

There are three major OS's in use today: Windows, Unix/Linux and Macintosh's OS X (OS 10).

Each has it's advantages: Windows is the most widely used OS, Unix/Linux is open source, so you can use it for free and the Mac OS X is very stable and has outstanding graphics capabilities.

In contrast, each also has distinct disadvantages: Windows crashes fairly easily and has many security vulnerabilities, Unix/Linux is not a mainstream system therefore it is more difficult to adapt to widespread use in an organization and Mac OS X has proprietary hardware from Apple meaning that you can't put OS X on any hardware you would like.

Some names of some lesser known systems include: Solaris, BSD, QNX and VxWorks. To my knowledge, there are no PACS systems running on any of these lesser known OS's.

As a PACS administrator, I would recommend focusing on the Microsoft Server, XP and Vista platforms and learning Unix and Linux OS's when you have the oportunity. Learning to operate in the Unix/Linux environment is a great way to build text based computing skills. Anybody working as a PACS administrator at an Emageon PACS site can attest to that. 



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free Joomla PHP extensions, software, information and tutorials.
Last Updated on Thursday, 05 March 2009 22:18
 

PACS Equipment: Patch management and Anti-Virus Software

E-mail Print PDF

On April Fool’s day, the world was set to absorb the wrath of the Conficker worm.  After April 1st came and went, many thought the scope of the virus was a hoax but in yesterday’s edition of Health Imaging and IT, an article ran that spoke of the Conficker worm beginning to make its presence known on medical imaging devices.  The article started out by making it sound like an MRI scanner was infected but then clarified the statement by saying that engineers who were monitoring the internet said that, “an imaging machine used to review high-resolution images was reaching out over the internet to get instructions - presumably from the programmers who created Conficker” (HealthImaging.com , 2009).  Well, this machine sounds like nothing more than the average 3D workstation that comes with many scanners these days and that brings me to the point of this discussion, how do you handle virus protection and patch management on your PACS equipment and imaging devices?

Often, actually, almost always, vendors of medical imaging equipment don’t let you touch their products with regards to putting your own software on their equipment.  This puts the organization in a precarious position.  After some time, the trial virus software installed on the workstation expires, leaving the device un-protected. Even when it is protected, the AV software isn’t regularly updated so the virus definitions aren’t current.  I think it is time for the vendors to start allowing us to put our organizational anti-virus software on these devices.

Patch management is also a problem.  Microsoft released a security patch for the Conficker worm but often, vendors don’t supply uses with these patches in a package that can be easily installed on those devices.  As system administrators, we can go install them ourselves but we are then again faced with the vendor potentially not supporting us by saying we installed unapproved software on the device.

So, is it the responsibility of the vendor to develop better methods of applying anti-virus protection and patch management solutions or do we, as system administrators, take it upon ourselves to deploy these protective measures on our equipment? Weigh in on this topic in the JSPACS Forum. 


References: http://www.healthimaging.com/index.php?option=com_articles&view=article&id=17323:conficker-computer-virus-snakes-its-way-into-medical-devices



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free Joomla PHP extensions, software, information and tutorials.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 05 May 2009 08:22
 


Page 3 of 6

JS PACS Login

There is a lot of content that can't be seen unless you login!

Currently in Chat

No users online

Polls

Who is your preferred Hi-Res Monitor Vendor?