MWL\MPPS integration - DICOM

This is a discussion on MWL\MPPS integration - DICOM ; I have a technical issue, lets say we have a server that support MWL and PPS, now creating PPS instances will include referencing the MWL information (Patient information, Requested Procedure information and Scheduled Procedure Information) since these information are used ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: MWL\MPPS integration

  1. MWL\MPPS integration

    I have a technical issue, lets say we have a server that support MWL
    and PPS, now creating PPS instances will include referencing the MWL
    information (Patient information, Requested Procedure information and
    Scheduled Procedure Information) since these information are used to
    fill the PPS Relationship Module.

    If the RIS requested to delete a MWL information that already has a PPS
    instance in the server database, Do we still need to provide the MWL
    relational information for this PPS instance if the RIS queried for
    this PPS or an N-GET command was performed on the server? (Relational
    attributes in the MPPS N-GET are either type 2 or type 3, so we can
    return empty attribute values).

    Any opinions with this will be very helpful.

    Thanks
    Zaid H. Safadi


  2. Re: MWL\MPPS integration


    Hercules Dev. wrote:
    > I have a technical issue, lets say we have a server that support MWL
    > and PPS, now creating PPS instances will include referencing the MWL
    > information (Patient information, Requested Procedure information and
    > Scheduled Procedure Information) since these information are used to
    > fill the PPS Relationship Module.
    >
    > If the RIS requested to delete a MWL information that already has a PPS
    > instance in the server database, Do we still need to provide the MWL
    > relational information for this PPS instance if the RIS queried for
    > this PPS or an N-GET command was performed on the server? (Relational
    > attributes in the MPPS N-GET are either type 2 or type 3, so we can
    > return empty attribute values).
    >
    > Any opinions with this will be very helpful.
    >
    > Thanks
    > Zaid H. Safadi


    I can't tell what scenario you're imagining from a clinical, real world
    perspective. First, there is no explicit standard message for a RIS to
    request an MWL entry to be removed. It is anticipated this action would
    occur either directly in the RIS DB or after an event communicated
    between a PACS and RIS indicating the imaging procedure has been
    completed and is no longer needed on the MWL. Under the IHE framework,
    the PPS N-Set messages could perform this function. The Image
    Availability messages could also perform this delete function.

    The relational DB records underlying MWL entries often continue to
    exist in the MWL provider system DB after the entry is no longer
    presented and included in MWL SCP query responses, especially when the
    MWL SCP system DB is the same system/DB as the PPS SCP and these
    records are linked; but the DICOM standard is silent on whether a
    system retains these records or not. Similarly, it is silent as to when
    a MWL SCP actually stops including relational records in MWL queries.
    These are determined by the functionality of the MWL provider system
    and the environment in which it operates


  3. Re: MWL\MPPS integration

    Thanks for your reply, i beleive u r right and this issue is dependent
    on the enviroment and the RIS system, and yes the DICOM standard is
    silent about these important issues but hope that the IHE can solve
    these questions in the future as a implementation framework.

    For the time being i beleive i'll leave it as an option for the RIS
    system to decide.

    Thanks again
    Zaid H. Safadi

    eric.goodall@gmail.com wrote:
    > Hercules Dev. wrote:
    > > I have a technical issue, lets say we have a server that support MWL
    > > and PPS, now creating PPS instances will include referencing the MWL
    > > information (Patient information, Requested Procedure information and
    > > Scheduled Procedure Information) since these information are used to
    > > fill the PPS Relationship Module.
    > >
    > > If the RIS requested to delete a MWL information that already has a PPS
    > > instance in the server database, Do we still need to provide the MWL
    > > relational information for this PPS instance if the RIS queried for
    > > this PPS or an N-GET command was performed on the server? (Relational
    > > attributes in the MPPS N-GET are either type 2 or type 3, so we can
    > > return empty attribute values).
    > >
    > > Any opinions with this will be very helpful.
    > >
    > > Thanks
    > > Zaid H. Safadi

    >
    > I can't tell what scenario you're imagining from a clinical, real world
    > perspective. First, there is no explicit standard message for a RIS to
    > request an MWL entry to be removed. It is anticipated this action would
    > occur either directly in the RIS DB or after an event communicated
    > between a PACS and RIS indicating the imaging procedure has been
    > completed and is no longer needed on the MWL. Under the IHE framework,
    > the PPS N-Set messages could perform this function. The Image
    > Availability messages could also perform this delete function.
    >
    > The relational DB records underlying MWL entries often continue to
    > exist in the MWL provider system DB after the entry is no longer
    > presented and included in MWL SCP query responses, especially when the
    > MWL SCP system DB is the same system/DB as the PPS SCP and these
    > records are linked; but the DICOM standard is silent on whether a
    > system retains these records or not. Similarly, it is silent as to when
    > a MWL SCP actually stops including relational records in MWL queries.
    > These are determined by the functionality of the MWL provider system
    > and the environment in which it operates



+ Reply to Thread