Survey-based Evaluation of the Use of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems in an Eye Hospital-Ophthalmologists' Perspective.

PURPOSE: Picture archiving and communication system (PACS) is a medical imaging system for sharing, storage, retrieval, and access of medical images stored. Our study aimed to identify ophthalmologists' views on PACS, with the comparison between 3 platforms, namely electronic patient record (ePR), HEYEX (Heidelberg Engineering, Switzerland), and FORUM (Zeiss, US), following their implementation in an eye hospital for common ophthalmic investigations [visual field, optical coherence tomography (OCT) of retinal nerve fiber layer and macula, and fluorescein/indocyanine green angiography (FA/ICG)]. METHODS: An online survey was distributed among ophthalmologists in a single center. Primary outcome included comparison of PACS with paper-based system. Secondary outcomes included pattern of use and comparison of different PACS platforms. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 28/37 (75.7%). Images were most commonly accessed through ePR (median: 80% of time, interquartile range: 50 to 90%).All systems scored highly in information display items (median scores ≥7.5 out of 10) and in reducing patient identification error in investigation filing and retrieval during consultation compared to paper (score ≥7.0). However, ePR was inferior to paper in "facilitating comparison with previous results" in all investigation types (scores 3.0 to 4.5). ePR scored significantly higher in all system quality items than HEYEX ( P  < 0.001) and FORUM ( P  < 0.022), except login response time ( P  = 0.081). HEYEX scored significantly higher among vitreoretinaluveitis members (VRU) for information quality items for OCT macula and FA/ICG [VRU: 10.0 (8.0 to 10.0), non-VRU: 8.0 (6.75 to 9.25), P  = 0.042]. CONCLUSIONS: Overall feedback for PACS among ophthalmologists was positive, with limitations of inefficiency in use of information, for example, comparison with previous results. Subspecialty played an important role in evaluating PACS.

Measuring spleen stiffness to predict varices in chronic hepatitis B cirrhotic patients with or without receiving non-selective beta-blockers.

OBJECTIVES: we aimed to investigate the accuracy of liver (LSM) spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) with transient elastography (TE) to predict varices in the presence of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study of consecutive patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and cirrhosis, all patients underwent TE and upper endoscopic examinations. LSM and SSM in predicting varices in patients receiving and not receiving NSBB were evaluated. RESULTS: Altogether 144 CHB patients (29 receiving NSBB; 35 with any varices, 31 and 11 with esophageal and gastric varices, respectively) were recruited. Their mean LSM and SSM were 13.3 ± 9.0 kPa and 32.8 ± 19.2 kPa, respectively. The correlation between LSM and SSM was better in the NSBB subgroup (r = 0.525, P = 0.003) than its counterpart (r = 0.329, P < 0.001). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of LSM and SSM for any varices was 0.675 and 0.685 (P = 0.002 and 0.001), respectively. SSM of 18.9 kPa had a negative predictive value of 92.1% and negative likelihood ratio of 0.27 for ruling out any varices; and SSM of 54.9 kPa had a positive predictive value of 56.5% and a positive likelihood ratio of 4.05 to rule in varices. The AUROC of LSM for varices was 0.742 and 0.549 in patients with or without NSBB, respectively; the corresponding AUROC of SSM was 0.572 and 0.603, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SSM only has modest accuracy to predict varices independent of NSBB use. An SSM cutoff value of 18.9 kPa may be adopted to achieve a high negative predictive value to rule out varices.