Advertisement

Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 73–80 | Cite as

Monitoring the PACS Implementation Process in a Large University Hospital—Discrepancies Between Radiologists and Physicians

  • Philippe Duyck
  • Bram PynooEmail author
  • Pieter Devolder
  • Tony Voet
  • Luc Adang
  • Dries Ovaere
  • Jan Vercruysse
Article

Abstract

Successfully introducing a new technology in a health-care setting is not a walk in the park. Many barriers need to be overcome, not only technical and financial but also human barriers. In this study, we focus on the human barriers to health-care information systems’ implementation. We monitored the acceptance of a Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) by radiologists and hospital physicians in a large Belgian university hospital. Hereto, questionnaires were taken pre-implementation (T1) and 1 year after the radiology department stopped printing film (T2). The framework we used to perform the study was the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Main findings were that both groups were positive toward PACS prior to the introduction and that each group was even more positive at T2 with extensive PACS experience. In general, the ratings of the radiologists were higher than those of the physicians, as the radiologists experienced more of the benefits of PACS and had to use PACS throughout the day. Two factors were salient for predicting users’ intention to use PACS: the usefulness of PACS (performance expectancy) and the availability of support of any kind (facilitating conditions). The results show that our approach was successful. Both radiologists and physicians give evidence of an excellent level of user acceptance. We can conclude that the implementation of PACS into our hospital has succeeded.

Key words

PACS acceptance testing computers in medicine radiology workflow UTAUT attitude university hospital 

References

  1. 1.
    Lapointe L, Rivard S: A multilevel model of resistance to information technology implementation. MIS Quarterly 29(3):461–491, 2005Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berg M: Implementing information systems in health care organizations: myths and challenges. Int J Med Inform 64(2–3):143–156, 2001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pare G, Trudel MC: Knowledge barriers to PACS adoption and implementation in hospitals. Int J Med Inform 76(1):22–33, 2007CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kohli R, Kettinger WJ: Informating the clan: controlling physicians’ costs and outcomes. MIS Quarterly 28(3):363–394, 2004Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van de Wetering RV, Batenburg R, Versendaal J, Lederman R, Firth L: A balanced evaluation perspective: picture archiving and communication system impacts on hospital workflow. J Digit Imaging 19:10–17, 2006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reddy AS, Loh S, Kane RA: Budget variance analysis of a departmentwide implementation of a PACS at a major academic medical center. J Digit Imaging 19:66–71, 2006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hayt DB, Alexander S: The pros and cons of implementing PACS and speech recognition systems. J Digit Imaging 14(3):149–157, 2001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lepanto L, Pare G, Aubry D, Robillard P, Lesage J: Impact of PACS on dictation turnaround time and productivity. J Digit Imaging 19(1):92–97, 2006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bryan S, Weatherburn GC, Watkins JR, Buxton MJ: The benefits of hospital-wide picture archiving and communication systems: a survey of clinical users of radiology services. Br J Radiol 72(857):469–478, 1999PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nitrosi A, Borasi G, Nicoli F, Modigliani G, Botti A, Bertolini M, et al: A filmless radiology department in a full digital regional hospital: quantitative evaluation of the increased quality and efficiency. J Digit Imaging 20(2):140–148, 2007CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bauman RA, Gell G: The reality of picture archiving and communication systems (PACS): a survey. J Digit Imaging 13(4):157–169, 2000CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson KC, Dye JA: Ten steps to improve your chances for success with PACS. Radiol Manage 17(3):32–33, 1995PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Law MYY, Zhou Z: New direction in PACS education and training. Comput Med Imaging Graph 27(2–3):147–56, 2003CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Devolder P, Pynoo B, Voet T, Adang L, Vercruysse J, Duyck P: Optimizing physicians’ instruction of PACS through E-learning: cognitive load theory applied. J Digit Imaging, in press doi: 10.1007/s10278-007-9089-5
  15. 15.
    Pilling J: Problems facing the radiologist tendering for a hospital wide PACS system. Eur J Radiol 32(2):101–105, 1999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pare G, Lepanto L, Aubry D, Sicotte C: Toward a multidimensional assessment of picture archiving and communication system success. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 21(4):471–479, 2005CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR: User acceptance of computer-technology—a comparison of 2 theoretical-models. Manage Sci 35(8):982–1003, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD: User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3):425–478, 2003Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Duyck P, Pynoo B, Devolder P, Adang L, Vercruysse J, Voet T: Do hospital physicians really want to go digital? Acceptance of a picture archiving and communication system in a university hospital. Rofo 180(7):631–638, 2008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Duyck P, Pynoo B, Devolder P, Voet T, Adang L, Vercruysse J: User acceptance of a picture archiving and communication system—applying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology in a radiological setting. Methods Inf Med 47(2):149–156, 2008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moore GC, Benbasat I: Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Inf Syst Res 2(3):192–222, 1991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chau PYK, Hu PJH: Investigating healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept telemedicine technology. An empirical test of competing theories. Inf Manage 39(4):297–311, 2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chismar WG, Wiley-Patton S: Does the extended technology acceptance model apply to physicians. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). 2003; p. 160aGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hu PJH, Chau PYK, Sheng ORL, Tam KY: Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J Manage Inf Syst 16(2):91–112, 1999Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philippe Duyck
    • 1
  • Bram Pynoo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Pieter Devolder
    • 1
  • Tony Voet
    • 1
  • Luc Adang
    • 1
  • Dries Ovaere
    • 1
  • Jan Vercruysse
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Medical ImagingGhent University HospitalGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations