Piecing together patient data: Integrated EHR a high priority for radiologists

With such a wide variety of PACS and electronic health records (EHRs) in the marketplace, decision-makers at hospitals and private practices have a lot to consider when purchasing new equipment. If they want to keep their radiologists happy, they may want to make sure the PACS can be properly integrated with the EHR.

According to a recent study published by the Journal of the American College of Radiology, an integrated EHR is a bigger priority to radiologists than having access to the most advanced clinical features.

Elliot Rinzler, MD, and Sarah Shaves, MD, Eastern Virginia Medical School department of radiology, surveyed radiologists from two large health systems about their EHR and PACS preferences. The health systems used similar EHRs, but different PACS; one health system operated an integrated PACS, while the other system used PACS technology that was unintegrated, but perceived as clinically stronger.

“Our radiologists valued the PACS-integrated but clinically weaker system more than the more clinically robust but unintegrated EHR,” the authors wrote. “For imaging interpretation, rapid access to limited data appears to be more valuable than slower access to a larger variety of patient information. This suggests that our radiologists and residents use the EHR to answer focused clinical questions and that delays in data access could be a limiting factor in EHR use.”

The survey investigated some of the various reasons respondents would access these records. Ninety-six percent agreed or strongly agreed that an “unclear study indication” would increase their likelihood of using the EHR, and 76 percent said a condition associated with high mortality would increase their likelihood.

Respondents were also asked to agree or strongly agree with a few specific statements about their EHR’s helpfulness. Ninety-four percent of respondents had a positive response to “EHR data improves the quality of my reports” and “EHR data improves patient safety.” Meanwhile, 68 percent of respondents had a positive response to “EHR data improves care coordination,” while only 12 percent either disagreed or strongly disagreed that that sentiment.

Rinzler and Shaves wrote that their findings made a significant impact on the health system that had not yet integrated its PACS and EHR.

“We are happy to report that since our data were first presented locally, the larger, unintegrated hospital system has purchased and implemented a software module integrating the PACS and EHR systems,” the authors wrote. “Ultimately, PACS integration and other continuous improvements in our EHR systems will be necessary to achieve federally mandated goals and provide the best possible care for our patients.”

The authors did note a few limitations with the study, including the self-selection of participants and that much of the data was collected by using radiologists’ memory instead of exact, saved measurements. Interpretive errors of the participants’ open comments are a possibility as well.