Digital Breast Tomosynthesis will make it easier to see breast cancers in dense tissue and is becoming widely adopted. Compared to standard 2D mammograms, DBT offers a number of important advantages. The Oslo Study is the first large-scale study comparing the combination of DBT and 2D imaging with 2D imaging alone.
The study reported a 27 percent increase in cancer detection, a 40 percent increase in the detection of invasive cancers, and a 15 percent decrease in false positive recalls. The reduction in false positives not may help reduce duplicate studies, and may also have a major impact on reducing patient anxiety.
What does the future look like for radiology? In many ways, we’re already seeing it.
Radiology has steadily evolved to meet the challenges of modern healthcare systems. As providers shift from fee-for-service care to value-based care, advanced diagnostic imaging technologies must evolve to better track and quantify the value of care. The requirements of a radiologist are also evolving, as the health system seeks more insights from imaging services.
We’ve compiled a glimpse at how the diagnostic imaging industry is shaping the future, and how current technologies are being used to realize it.
We have made enormous progress in moving from volume-based care to value-based care and huge advances in curing disease. Of course, there’s always more to do. For example, the latest Institute of Medicine report provides an avenue to improve quality of care even further.
“Improving Diagnosis in Health Care,” says the majority of US patients will receive a late or wrong diagnosis in their lifetimes. It also says diagnostic errors contribute to approximately 10% of patient deaths. The report concludes that as the delivery of healthcare and the diagnostic process continue to increase in complexity, the error rate may worsen.
Communication seems to get easier every day — we can phone, text, email, Facebook message, and even Snapchat our friends and (in some cases) co-workers. But communicating with other clinicians about radiology results remains problematic.
The American College of Radiology Actionable Reporting Group separates findings into three categories: those requiring communication within minutes (Category 1), hours (Category 2), and days (Category 3). Categories 1 and 2 pose an immediate risk to the patient, requiring rapid and direct communication by the radiologist. Ironically, although Category 3 findings are significantly less urgent, their frequency means they are just as disruptive to radiology workflow as the first two.
Vendor neutral archives are designed to help reduce resource and financial pressures. The flexibility and neutrality of these radiology imaging archives provide key short- and long-term benefits for healthcare executives looking to offload time and cost.
Whether you need short-term relief from expensive PACS archives, or are looking to overhaul your entire imaging system, a vendor neutral archive (VNA) may be the answer.