Abstract
In 2016, the recommendations of the DICOM Standards Committee for the use of veterinary identification DICOM tags had its 10th anniversary. The goal of our study was to survey veterinary DICOM standard conformance in Germany regarding the specific identification tags veterinarians should use in veterinary diagnostic imaging. We hypothesized that most veterinarians in Germany do not follow the guidelines of the DICOM Standards Committee. We analyzed the metadata of 488 imaging studies of referral cases from 115 different veterinary institutions in Germany by computer-aided DICOM header readout. We found that 25 (5.1%) of the imaging studies fully complied with the “veterinary DICOM standard” in this survey. The results confirmed our hypothesis that the recommendations of the DICOM Standards Committee for the consistent and advantageous use of veterinary identification tags have found minimal acceptance amongst German veterinarians. DICOM does not only enable connectivity between machines, DICOM also improves communication between veterinarians by sharing correct and valuable metadata for better patient care. Therefore, we recommend that lecturers, universities, societies, authorities, vendors, and other stakeholders should increase their effort to improve the spread of the veterinary DICOM standard in the veterinary world.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wright MA, Ballance D, Robertson ID, Poteet B: Introduction to DICOM for the practicing veterinarian. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S14–S18, 2008
Bidgood, Jr WD, Horii SC: Introduction to the ACR-NEMA DICOM standard. Radiographics 12:345–355, 1992
Committee DS: NEMA PS3/ISO 12052, Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Standard, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Rosslyn, VA, USA DICOM Standards Committee
Committee DS: Veterinary identification tags (PS 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.16 2006), National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Rosslyn: DICOM Standards Committee, 2006
Widmer WR: Acquisition hardware for digital imaging. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S2–S8, 2008
McEvoy FJ, Svalastoga E: Security of patient and study data associated with DICOM images when transferred using compact disc media. J Digit Imaging 22:65–70, 2009
van Ooijen PMA, Guignot J, Mevel G, Oudkerk M: Incorporating out-patient data from CD-R into the local PACS using DICOM worklist features. J Digit Imaging 18:196–202, 2005
van Ooijen PMA, Roosjen R, de Blecourt MJ, van Dam R, Broekema A, Oudkerk M: Evaluation of the use of CD-ROM upload into the PACS or institutional web server. J Digit Imaging 19:72–77, 2006
Hammond G, Gemmill T, Mellor D, Sullivan M: Assessment of low-cost teleradiology for grading elbow dysplasia. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:20–25, 2008
Poteet BA: Veterinary teleradiology. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S33–S36, 2008
Puech PA, Boussel L, Belfkih S, Lemaitre L, Douek P, Beuscart R: DicomWorks: software for reviewing DICOM studies and promoting low-cost teleradiology. J Digit Imaging 20:122–130, 2007
Robertson ID, Saveraid T: Hospital, radiology, and picture archiving and communication systems. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S19–S28, 2008
Ballance D: The network and its role in digital imaging and communications in medicine imaging. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S29–S32, 2008
Puchalski SM: Image display. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S9–S13, 2008
Robertson I: Image dissemination and archiving. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 22:138–144, 2007
Wallack S: Digital image storage. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S37–S41, 2008
Kallman HE, Halsius E, Folkesson M, Larsson Y, Stenstrom M, Bath M: Automated detection of changes in patient exposure in digital projection radiography using exposure index from DICOM header metadata. Acta Oncol 50:960–965, 2011
Jahnen A, Kohler S, Hermen J, Tack D, Back C: Automatic computed tomography patient dose calculation using DICOM header metadata. Radiat Prot Dosim 147:317–320, 2011
Kallman HE, Halsius E, Olsson M, Stenstrom M: DICOM Metadata repository for technical information in digital medical images. Acta Oncol 48:285–288, 2009
Kuzmak PM, Dayhoff RE: Minimizing Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) modality worklist patient/study selection errors. J Digit Imaging 14:153–157, 2001
Reiner B, Siegel E, Kuzmak P, Severance S: Transmission failure rate for computed tomography examinations in a filmless imaging department. J Digit Imaging 13:79–82, 2000
Gough A, Thomas A: Breed predispositions to disease in dogs and cats, 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley, 2011
Drost WT, Reese DJ, Hornof WJ: Digital radiography artifacts. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 49:S48–S56, 2008
Gale ME, Gale DR: DICOM modality worklist: an essential component in a PACS environment. J Digit Imaging 13:101–108, 2000
Acknowledgements
The authors greatly acknowledge Dr. Julia Neugebauer for reviewing this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosure
The authors report state no financial or other conflicts of interest related to this report.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brühschwein, A., Klever, J., Wilkinson, T. et al. DICOM Standard Conformance in Veterinary Medicine in Germany: a Survey of Imaging Studies in Referral Cases. J Digit Imaging 31, 13–18 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-017-9998-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-017-9998-x