Abstract
ObjectiveTo analyze the budget impact of using the picture archiving and communication system (PACS) in comparison to the screen/film system. MethodsThe budget impact analysis was conducted on the basis of registry data from the Clinics Hospital of the Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil. The budget impacts were compared between the PACS, with high- and low-cost PACS architectures, and the screen/film system by considering reference and alternative scenarios over the course of 5 years. ResultsThe budget impact associated with the use of PACS was lower than that associated with the use of the screen/film system in all the evaluated scenarios. The low-cost PACS architecture (mini-PACS) had an even lower budget impact, especially in the scenario in which a simulation of lower numbers of medical examinations was performed. ConclusionsThe screen/film system had a high budget impact in all the scenarios evaluated, wherein its costs were higher than the available budget. In contrast, the PACS (high- and low-cost architectures) showed a budget impact that allowed for savings in resources, especially the mini-PACS. Therefore, we recommend the implementation and use of the PACS in health services with any volume of examinations performed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.