A cost analysis of film image management and four PACS based on different network protocols

Picture Archive and Communication Systems (PACS), which allow the electronic acquisition, storage, transportation, and viewing of medical images, hold the eventual promise of reduced costs, improved image-management logistics, and ultimately, improved patient care. But at what point in the future will PACS really cost less than film-based image management for a given hospital size; and how are these costs affected by the choice of the digital communication network? To address these questions, a static differential cost model has been constructed. PAC systems based on two high-speed networks (less than 150 megabytes per second Mbps) and two low-speed networks, as well as film, were considered for five different sized hospitals (ranging from 15,000 to 125,000 procedures per year) and two time periods (1995 and 2000). PACS equipment was assumed to have a payoff of five years. The model considered all capital and supply costs and personnel costs for the PACS and for film storage and retrieval. It did not consider any possible cost savings from logistics improvement likely to result from the adoption of a PACS. Based on the assumptions outlined, high-speed-network PACS are less costly than those based on low-speed networks for all scenarios considered. Further, even though all possible PACS cost savings were not considered, high-speed network PACS appear to be less costly than film for hospitals larger than 60,000 procedures in 1995 and larger than 15,000 in 2000, while low-speed-network PACS should cost less than film for 60,000 and 30,000 procedure hospitals in 1995 and 2000 respectively.