Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Study of Radiologic Technologists’ Perceptions of Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) Competence and Educational Issues in Western Australia

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although the implementation of picture archiving and communication system (PACS) could increase productivity of radiology departments, this depends on factors such as the PACS competence of radiologic technologists (RTs). The purpose of this study was to investigate the RTs’ perceptions of PACS competence and educational issues in Western Australia (WA). A hardcopy questionnaire was distributed to WA RTs for obtaining their perceptions of PACS competence and educational issues. Descriptive (percentage of frequency, mean and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (t test and analysis of variance) were used to analyze the responses of the multiple choice and five-point scale questions from the returned questionnaires. The questionnaire response rate was 57.7 % (173 out of 300). The mean values of all PACS competence questions except questions 2e–g are in the range of 3.9–4.9, i.e., around competent to very competent. Participants indicated they received adequate PACS training (mean 3.8). Statistically significant variables influencing RTs’ perceptions of their PACS competence and educational issues including the age (p < 0.01), gender (p < 0.05), years of practice (p < 0.005–0.05), primary duty (p < 0.05), medical imaging qualification (p < 0.001), general computer skills (p < 0.001), and type of PACS education received (p < 0.001–0.05). The WA RTs indicated that they were competent in using the modality workstation, PACS and radiology information system, and received adequate training. However, future PACS education programs should be tailored to different RTs’ groups. For example, multiple training modules might be necessary to support the PACS competence development of older RTs and those with lower general computer literacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Reiner B, Siegel E, Kuzmak P, Severance S: Transmission failure rate for computed tomography examinations in a filmless imaging department. J Digit Imaging 13(2):79–82, 2000

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Reiner B, Siegel E, Scanlon M: Changes in technologist productivity with implementation of an enterprisewide PACS. J Digit Imaging 15(1):22–26, 2002

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Carrino JA, Goldburgh MM: SCAR radiologic technologist survey: analysis of the impact of digital technologies on productivity. J Digit Imaging 15(3):132–140, 2002

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Redfern RO, Langlotz CP, Abbuhl SB, Polansky M, Horii SC, Kundel HL: The effect of PACS on the time required for technologists to produce radiographic images in the emergency department radiology suite. J Digit Imaging 15(3):153–160, 2002

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Hooper FJ, Siddiqui KM, Musk A, Walker L, Chacko A: Multi-institutional analysis of computed and direct radiography part I. Technologist productivity. Radiology 236:413–419, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Redfern RO, Horii SC, Feingold E, Kundel HL: Radiology workflow and patient volume: effect of picture archiving and communication systems on technologists and radiologists. J Digit Imaging 13(2):97–100, 2000

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gale ME, Gale DR: DICOM modality worklist: an essential component in a PACS environment. J Digit Imaging 13(3):101–108, 2000

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Honea R: How many people does it take to operate a picture archiving and communication system? J Digit Imaging 14(2):40–43, 2001

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuzmak PM, Dayhoff RE: Minimizing Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) modality worklist patient/study selection errors. J Digit Imaging 14(2):153–157, 2001

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Awan OA, van Wagenberg F, Daly M, Safdar N, Nagy P: Tracking delays in report availability caused by incorrect exam status with Web-based issue tracking: a quality initiative. J Digit Imaging 24(2):300–307, 2011

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Watson L, Odle TG: Patient safety and quality in medical imaging: the radiologic Technologist’s role. American Society of Radiologic Technologists, Albuquerque, NM, 2013

    Google Scholar 

  12. Medical Radiation Practice Board of Australia: Accreditation standards: medical radiation practice. Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, Canberra, ACT, 2013

    Google Scholar 

  13. Blado MEE, Carr SG: PACS training modules at Texas Children’s hospital. J Digit Imaging 17(2):124–133, 2004

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nagy P, Bowers G, Reiner BI, Siegel EL: Defining the PACS profession: an initial survey of skills, training, and capabilities for PACS administrators. J Digit Imaging 18(4):252–259, 2005

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Law MYY, Zhou Z: New direction in PACS education and training. Comput Med Imaging Graph 27:147–156, 2003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Samei E, Seibert JA, Andriole K, Badano A, Crawford J, Reiner B, Flynn MJ, Chang P: AAPM/RSNA tutorial on equipment selection: PACS equipment overview. RadioGraphics 24:313–334, 2004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Olbrish K, Shanken P, Rabe D, Steven L, Irizarry N: Four-year enterprise PACS support trend analysis. J Digit Imaging 24(2):284–294, 2011

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Johnson B, Christensen L: Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches, 4th edition. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  19. State Government of Victoria: Medical radiation labour force. State Government of Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wright KB: Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and Web survey services. J Comput Mediat Commun 10(3):00, 2005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lavrakas PJ: Encyclopedia of survey research methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2008

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Hammer CS: The importance of participant demographics. Am J Speech-Lang Pathol 20:261, 2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. van de Mortel TF: Faking It: social desirability response bias in self-report research. Aust J Adv Nurs 25(4):40–48, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chakera T, Nagree Y, Song S, Jones P: Bridging the communication Gap between public and private radiology services. Med J Aust 191(10):558–560, 2009

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ng CKC, White P, McKay JC: Establishing a method to support academic and professional competence throughout an undergraduate radiography programme. Radiography 14:255–264, 2008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bentley HB: Early days of radiography. Radiography 11:45–50, 2005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rogers H, Pratt S, Brown P, Gambling T: Confidence in the Use of information management and technology (IM&T) in radiography: is Age a barrier? Radiography 16:230–237, 2010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee C, Huang M: The influence of computer literacy and computer anxiety on computer self-efficacy: the moderating effect of gender. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 17(3):172–180, 2014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. University C: Courses handbook 2014. Curtin University, Bentley, WA, 2014

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hargittai E: Survey measures of Web-oriented digital literacy. Soc Sci Comput Rev 23(3):371–379, 2005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. McDowell DE, Ma X: Computer literacy in baccalaureate nursing students during the last 8 year. Comput Inform Nurs 25(1):30–36, 2007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Norman CD, Skinner HA: EHEALS: the eHealth literacy scale. J Med Internet Res 8(4):e27, 2006

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all WA RTs who participated in this study for their contributions of time and effort.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Discipline of Medical Imaging, Department of Imaging and Applied Physics, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia, 6845, Australia

    Daniel M. Floyd, Errol R. Trepp, Maryam Ipaki & Curtise K. C. Ng

Authors
  1. Daniel M. Floyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Errol R. Trepp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maryam Ipaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Curtise K. C. Ng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Curtise K. C. Ng.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Floyd, D.M., Trepp, E.R., Ipaki, M. et al. Study of Radiologic Technologists’ Perceptions of Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) Competence and Educational Issues in Western Australia. J Digit Imaging 28, 315–322 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-014-9765-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-014-9765-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation