comp.protocols.dicom - Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine.
We have requested to increase the accession number field size on our PACS. However, our PACS vendor has stated that the length of the accession number field is 16 characters, which is a DICOM standard and cannot be altered. I cannot find any standard to support this, does anyone know if the field size of 16 characters for the accession number is a DICOM standard and cannot be altered?
Dear All Thank in Advance I have doubt. In our RIS We have patient reconcilation and we reconcile order againt the study after getting IAN. We have a doubt when the Emergency scan is done the radiographer does give accession number. and the scan is done and images are routed and the radiologist reports it. But when we reconcile a study whether we need to take the accession number from the study or from the RIS generated one. So if we take the accession number from study , there can human error generated to put the same accession number again. As it is emergency scan, Flims are taken and the filim which have the accession number from the study. So kindly help me and whether IHE says anything about this..? with regards DICOM_TESTER
Are accession numbers assigned to studies or series or can it be either?
I am working on an algorithm with matches RIS data to studies in my existing image server. I would like to rewrite my image SOP instances with the reconciled data to export to a cleaner database (migration and data cleansing). However, many imaging studies represent more than one requested RIS study (eg CT Abdomen/CT Pelvis.) Even after reviewing Annex J of Part 17, it is still not clear to me the best way to represent multiple requested studies (from the RIS) by their accession numbers. I notice the MPPS instance has a Scheduled Step Attributes sequence which can contain a accession number, but this is not supposed to be part of an image SOP instance, is it? The Request Attributes sequence can be in the image SOP instance, but it only contains Requested Procedure ID and Requested Procedure Step ID, not specifically an accession number. Would mapping the accession number to the Requested Procedure ID be the most acceptable/standardized way of handling this? Any thoughts? Thanks. Cliff Sweet