3 CVIS Add-Ons to Help Make Your Cardiology Workflow More Efficient

Two Doctors Discuss Cardiology WorkflowWhen investing in a cardiovascular information solution (CVIS), many organizations choose only the core modules they feel will be most impactful. They reduce the initial investment by focusing on a few key areas, then rely on third-party workarounds to cover the rest of the department.

This multi-vendor approach can lead to a higher lifetime cost of ownership. A patchwork system requires multiple points of integration with the EMR. This means more maintenance for IT and more possible points of failure. It can also be a drain on time and resources, requiring redundant human effort for tasks an integrated system can perform automatically.


Royal College of Radiology Expects Departments to Step Up to New Communication and Fail-safe Alert Notification Standards

Radiologist communicating critical findingsNoting that only 34% of UK radiology departments use an automated alert system and just 17% have the ability to perform enterprise-wide tracking on radiology reports for referring physicians, the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) recently released a report outlining new standards to be implemented across the region.

There are 10 reporting standards recommended in the report:

1. All radiological reports should be produced, read, and acted upon in a timely fashion, best to serve the patients’ needs.

2. It is the responsibility of the radiologist to produce reports as quickly and efficiently as possible, and to flag reports when they feel a fail-safe alert is required


Cardiology Imaging Roundup: 4 Articles Not to Miss This Month

cardiologists discuss patient careAdvances in technology are poised to revolutionize value-based care throughout health care systems, and especially in the cardiology department. Non-invasive procedures, automated diagnostic tools, and more accurate imaging can all help improve risk assessment and treatment plan development.

The articles in this roundup highlight significant and promising developments in technology that may shape the cardiology department of the future.

1. Study Identifies Aortic Valve Gradient as Key to TAVR Outcomes

Second-generation TAVR valves were a major topic of discussion at ACC 2016. These valves show promising results versus open-chest surgery for high and intermediate-risk patients. It is expected that further study will show the procedure is recommended for low-risk patients as well, making the cath lab an ever more important part of the cardiology department.


Balancing People, Processes and Technology to Drive Effective Transformation in Health Care


The U.S. health care system’s shift from volume to value has driven an influx of information technology solutions, but as in any industry, it takes more than new technology to be successful.  Transformative change in health care requires the right combination of people, process and technology. Without a broader perspective, you may embark on a fragmented approach that takes into account only one of these factors at a time. Adding technology addresses individual problems but may ultimately create unnecessary complexity. Adding processes can standardize workflow, but may make change difficult if the processes are unwieldy. Adding people can alleviate work, but the right people may prove difficult to find, and come at additional cost.


National Transformations Result in Significantly Improved Outcomes in Ireland and Canada

Support better patient outcomes with peer reviewRecently I was at UKRC, the largest radiology tradeshow in the UK, and I had the opportunity to join two McKesson customers at a symposium about transformation driven by quality in imaging. These customers told us how their organizations used strong governance groups, data-driven decision making processes and continuous improvement to improve quality in their imaging workflows across their entire enterprises.

I believe that with the adoption of Accountable Care and Value-Based-Care in the United States, there are more and more similarities between the challenges the public system in the UK and Ireland face and the challenges the health providers in the US face. While there are differences in geography, the desire for improved quality and consistent improvement through peer review are truly universal.