Experience measuring performance improvement in multiphase picture archiving and communications systems implementations

When planning a picture archiving and communications system (PACS) implemen tation and determining which equipment will be implemented in earlier and l ater phases, collection and analysis of selected data will aid in setting i mplementation priorities. If baseline data are acquired relative to perform ance objectives, the same information used for implementation planning can be used to measure performance improvement and outcomes. The main categorie s of data to choose from are: (1) financial data; (2) productivity data; (3 ) operational parameters; (4) clinical data; and (5) information about cust omer satisfaction. In the authors' experience, detailed workflow data have not proved valuable in measuring PACS performance and outcomes. Reviewing o nly one category of data in planning will not provide adequate basis for ta rgeting operational improvements that will lead to the most significant gai ns. Quality improvement takes into account all factors in production: human capacity, materials, operating capital and assets. Once we have identified key areas of focus for quality improvement in each phase, we can translate objectives into implementation requirements and finally into detailed func tional and performance requirements. Here, Integration Resources reports it s experience measuring PACS performance relative to phased implementation s trategies for three large medical centers. Each medical center had its own objectives for overcoming image management, physical/geographical, and func tional/technical barriers. The report outlines (1) principal financial and nonfinancial measures used as performance indicators; (2) implementation st rategies chosen by each of the three medical centers; and (3) the results o f those strategies as compared with baseline data. Copyright (C) 1999 by W. B. Saunders Company.