Benefits of a PACS
Better Quality of Service and Cost Savings

• Improved Diagnostic Capabilities – Diagnostic workstations with powerful and easy to use tools enable radiologists to detect more information regarding patients.
• Improved Workflow – The process of handling patients and their information is much more efficient.
• Reduced X-ray Retakes – The CR hardware reduces the number of retakes due to under or overexposure.
• Fewer or No Missing Records – Misplaced films are a major problem for hospitals.
• Availability – PACS makes it easy and quick to share patient studies with those who need to see them: radiologists, physicians within the hospital, referring physicians, clinicians, and specialists even at distant locations.
• Security – PACS facilitates enforcing hospital privacy policies and procedures through user accounts, logging, and encryption - ensuring that only those authorized to see patient information have access to it.
• Reduced Film Storage Costs – Both space required for storage and labor for filing and retrieving will diminish with no new films being added to the physical archive.
• Improved Timeliness in Record Retrieval – Information comes up almost instantaneously, as opposed to clinicians having to sometimes look all over the facilities trying to find films.
• Onsite Redundant Storage – Two servers on site mirror up to two years of stored images.
• Disaster Recovery – NWPACS will maintain duplicate copies of all patient studies off site for quick disaster recovery and long-term storage, a feature not feasible with physical film.
• Teleradiology – Radiologists can review patients’ studies remotely – home, etc.

Reasons for PACS - Information From Mayo Clinic
Departments should not forget, in their deliberations over the implementation of PACS, that the use of film is accompanied by a significant ongoing cost. Film has its virtues, but it remains very expensive. Failure to invest in PACS constitutes a commitment by omission to the present and future costs of film storage. An excellent study has examined the 7-year costs of the storage and handling of film (for adult patients, studies are retained for 7 years). The estimate of King et al at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, was $15.82 per examination. Of this cost, $6.25 was attributable to film for a four-sheet examination; for many modalities such as MRI, however, more sheets of film will be used. For supplies associated with processing and packaging, $1.46 was spent. Personnel costs for film handling were $5.91 within the radiology department and $2.20 outside it (spent, for example, when nurses or clerical staff must attempt to locate missing films).

Even at $15.82, the investigators noted that their cost estimate was probably lower than the real costs encountered at other institutions. The Mayo Clinic performs a million radiology examinations per year and estimates that maintaining its film library costs $16 million per year. This can be extrapolated to other institutions at a rate of $1.5 million or more per 100,000 examinations. There is a significant cost associated with every film study performed today, and that cost will continue in force as long as the film is retained by the institution.

For this reason, PACS represents a classic tradeoff: today’s equipment costs versus ongoing costs for film, supplies, and personnel. Those proposing PACS implementation, however, should exercise caution in claiming future savings for which they will be held accountable by their administrators. Realistic business and operational plans for achieving these savings should be in place before the elimination of film-associated costs is counted upon to offset the cost of PACS.

REFERENCE
King BF, Ward S, Bruesewitz R, et al. Cost of film: purchasing, processing, packaging, storing and disposal over the lifetime of a film examination in a large radiology department. Society for Computer Applications in Radiology. 1996;152-157.