Slashdot Mirror
iPods Used for Medical Images
spagiola writes "There's a nice little story on CNN about a doctor in Geneva who has developed ways to use iPods to view medical images. His software, called Osirix (OSS, BTW) enables medical professionals to view medical images on their iPods, saving them and the hospitals they work for thousands of dollars in expensive equipment."
It looks like it started out as a simple, "portable hard drive" system... hardly different from the stories about storing BLAST data or Lord of the Rings clips on an iPod. The addition of the iPod's photo-display capabilities and - more significantly, I think - the iChat sharing makes this sound like a setup. I wonder when they will incorporate support for the iPod's video capabilities...
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Several patients diagnosed with "just a scratch".
You could have read the article, they just use the iPods to save the photo and carry it around (the photo capability of the iPod was added even after the project was started).
Not exactly what TFA says, they don't 'use' the iPod to 'view', they store the images on the iPod in file mode, so the article could re-written to say:
Some people have created sofware which allows images to be stored on an external hard drive.
In other words....
Nothing to see here, this is not the video/photo ipod in action.
Wouldn't they have to be 'secured' to compy with HIPAA regulations in any way? iPods are easily pocketed, and I would think an iPod with Medical Imaging files on it would be at risk...
Irony? Yea, it's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron!
How this is more cost-effective--or more effective, period--than low-cost color PDAs with CF microdrives. Surely the higher resolution, larger screen, and more flexible OS would be better?
It's true that high-capacity microdrives are more expensive, but that's still a lot of photos at that resolution.
However it compares, it awfully neat, though, and a good example of how technology can be a real life-improvement above pure entertainment.
Before anyone gets into a tiff about viewing the images on a small iPod screen, I suggest you read the article. The physicians are merely STORING the images on the iPod and then hooking the iPod up to a personal computer (w/nice monitor) to view the images.
To sum up, RTFA
Good to see they have addressed the risk of patient data being leaked (iPod being nicked or left on the bus), but the article isn't entirely clear on what the procedure for stripping the patient data is - does the user have to do it themselves, or does the software force you to do it each time you upload an image?
Still a very cool use - though maybe not one that could be easily rolled out across all areas of medicine unless it needs virtually zero technical know-how...
Shame really, our legal system is going to make adoption of new tools (in medicine in particular) difficult.
Still a neat concept. She should win an award or something just for outside the box thinking.
This article has recently been linked from Slashdot. Please keep an eye on the page history for errors or vandalism.
Using an iPod to store medical images is not a very good idea. There is no security, and no data integrity. And iPods are much more likely to be stolen than, say, a burned CD. All of that said, having a portable storage medium for medical images makes some sense. Perhaps this is yet another application for USB thumbdrives. Add some encryption (TrueCrypt) and an application (Osiris) that can be run from the drive and you might have a nifty little product.
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
I work in medical imaging, and I have used Osirix. It is easily one of the best open source image display programs around. The other most notable is Amide, but I digress. Osirix works well for scientists and others looking to save money, but I think physicians would have a difficult time saying it is better then the commercial vendors software. Commercial workstations are tens of thousands of dollars, and while the price is extremely inflated, you do often get a lot of functionality for that money. Osirix is no substitute for that. Osirix works fine as a third display terminal or something in the doctor's office, but I wouldn't want any radiologists I know using it as their primary reporting station.
The part about the iPods is interesting too. Having ready and portable access to images is neat, but of course, this is not used as a primary reporting tool. It is useful to take to conferences to share interesting cases, etc, but not for any other great purpose.
Plus, the doctors can have musical discussions with their patients, everything from "Doctor, doctor, gimme the news" to "I can see clearly now, the pain is gone"...
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
I do medical imaging in the U.S. for a livelihood. I'm pretty sure nobody has ever done a clinical read (e.g. medical evaluation resulting in a report) on the iPod. Anyone who would do that should have their board cert pulled and probably would do something else equally stupid. OSIRIS has been around for a while -- I don't see why it's news. The real issue is medical record privacy and the thought of med images running around on an iPod scares the bejeezus out of the boards or people responsible for HIPAA compliance at most institutions. If leaked, the header info that comes with a DICOM formatted data set easily violates privacy at a level sufficient to trigger a $15k slap on the wrist and/or 6months jail time.
For most imaging modalities reading on a 14 or 15" is not enough -- though I suppose PET/SPECT and UltraSound may be exceptions. Heck even high quality jpg compression can be lossy enough to cause missed stress fractures.
If you read the artical it states the store and run the diacom images off the ipod but doesnt say naything baout viewing the images on the ipod screan. After reading the artical i intrepreted it as the ipod is a cheap portable hard drive.
I agree - the doctor in this case is really just using the iPod as a portable hard drive. All physicians have to know is "plug in iPod, pictures go in. Plug in iPod, and select the picture you want to see". The software takes care of the rest.
There's nothing stopping someone from modifying the display software to encrypt the messages. I work in health care (systems and security architecture), and this would be a simple enough add-on.
Besides, people stealing the iPod are more likely to wipe out the files and just use it as a music player than spend time looking at some guy's X-ray images. (Unless they *really* get off on those kind of things.)
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
Ideas are always great, the practice is something else.
As mentioned in the article they are using is as a storage mechanism. While DVDs probably are big enough, they are also a lot more hassle to create quickly. In itself there isn't anything news worthy. They added the ability to save previews, that can be viewed on the iPod. While most people wouldn't want to do a detailed analysis, it is an easy way to see the obvious and even verify what you saved on your iPod. Plenty of other media devices could be used, but these guys are Mac developers, so they stick with what they know. Had they been MS-Windows developers, then they probably would have been using an iRiver device and MSN Messenger.
The tablet PC defeats the purpose of having a small portable device that you can take with you, and that tablet PC probably don't have the resolution need for displaying the images. iPods don't either, but you can easily plug them into a computer that does.
These guys are essentially trying to share news of their product. The fact that CNN gave them an article to do so is kudos to them.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
This is interesting. My first thought was why not use an external HDD - it would cost a fraction of the price, and would not be nearly as appealing a target for thieves.
Having worked in a hospital for a number of years, the real purpose behind this is evident. Hospitals like to give doctors stuff. Expensive stuff like PDAs and wristwatches, as well as basic stuff like umbrellas, pens, satchels and the free food and drinks well stocked in the physician break rooms. Hospitals make their money by having patients, and besides the Emergency Department, all patients are admitted to the hospital (or referred to for various procedures) by doctors. So hospitals like to give things to physicians to thank them for making them money. In the USA laws exist, and have been strengthened in the last several years, seriously limiting what hospitals can provide for physicians. This is of course to keep these gifts from becoming outright bribes.
Now in the case of these iPods we see a loophole. A way for the hospital to purchase really, really nice gifts for their doctors, under the pretense that it has some medical use. Quite interesting indeed.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
I can say that there are a LOT of things wrong with this article. This is pre-school journalism at its best. Hear me out...
My job title is PACS Administrator, which means I run the servers, network, diagnostic systems, etc for medical imaging in Radiology and other departments in a major healthcare organization.
Let me tell you, there are A LOT of problems with something like this. Some of this will be redundant, but I'm trying to capture everything into one post. First of all, the iPod is seen as a generic external hard drive. Big deal, they made their free DICOM viewer software have the ability to export to an external drive. Second, this is a MAJOR patient confidentiality issue, and I believe is considered legal under HIPAA, but if a physician, clinician, etc lost the iPod, they could go to JAIL. I'm not kidding.
Also, they also allude to actually viewing images on the photo iPods. I cannot imagine any image that could even be useful to a non-Radiology (referring phsyician, surgeon, etc) on those screens. About the lowest quality image that is useful even for referrals or comparisons is a 2MP monitor that displays at least 1280 resolution. Anything less than that is pretty much medically worthless, and for Radiologists, you typically need a 3MP display for proper detail, not to mention special graphics hardware.
I'm not quite sure if this CNN article is a cry for publicity from the developers of OsiriX, or Apple. The product page for Osirix barely even mentions the iPod functionality (in the changelogs), yet I doubt Apple would bother publicizing this.
As for the journalistic integrity, c'mon... I mean, the reporter spelled DICOM (format for medical image storage and transfer), "Diacom". They even spell out what it stands for after that, I don't see any A's in there!
Conclusion: you should all be very scared of careless happy-go-lucky doctors and clinicians running around with your patient data on their iPod at the gym trying to see whether you have a brain tumor while jogging in the park, when someone steals their iPod and sells it on eBay!
THE MAGIC WORDS ARE SQUEAMISH OSSIFRAGE
I'm afraid that you have cancer. I am deeply sorry. However, with proper chemotherapy and a positive outlook, chances are high that you can beat this dis...... wait.. wait.... That discoloration on your chart looks to be a Cheeto from breakfast. Nevermind!
Read the article. The doctor had an iPod, and started using it to move large files around. That in itself isn't news. It's the additional details.
.Mac to conveniently post images - stripped of identifiers for anonymity - to protected web space for additional consultation and reference purposes.
They can take a patient's data with them and study it at the office, at home, at a colleague's office. This doesn't require an iPod.
They added an image export function to put pictures in iPod-viewable format once the iPod Photo came out. That's pretty minor, but you can use it for reference, or output it to a TV for viewing. The resolution is still lower than original quality, but I can't speak to those details.
Then they used iChat AV for full-motion video streaming to other doctors. Again, the quality is lower, but the ability to consult with other doctors in real-time with the data can be invaluable. They also used
The real imaging work can't be done on the portable because it is very demanding... it's a 3d video of sorts. A tablet might be able to do the work, but the real point isn't using the images on-the-go, it's taking the images with you or sharing them.
The costs are negligible because the equipment is there... they have the Mac to use Osirix. That means they have the iChat software. They were using their own iPods. Sure, some medical facilities might end up buying a few iPods for this use... is that so terrible? I think the additional costs of training and deployment for Windows Tablet PCs and a different DICOM viewer far outweigh the costs of iPods... if they even have to buy them. Remember, for most of the uses - excepting the iPod-viewable photos and videos - any portable drive would do.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit