Pacs User Agreement

The decision to obtain a service contract should be based on logic and not on twisting the supplier`s arm. As with any clinical system, a PACS requires a service. It is enough to examine the value of the service agreement in relation to foreseeable needs and make a decision that is in the best financial and operational interest of the facility. Most other components of THE PACS, including the radiologist diagnostic workstations and the Radiology Information System (SIF), are generally excluded from operating time guarantees and service response clauses. In fact, most service agreements show that while 75% of diagnostic positions are lower (for example. B two out of eight workstations that do not work), the entire system is considered « up. » Explaining that the system is technically « high » to the two radiologists who cannot read and to the other six, who have to repeat the slump of their colleagues, may be a small challenge, but it is all part of what is called the « supplier logic » in terms of service agreements. Just as the cheapest part of a child are the actual hospital delivery costs, so the cheapest part of getting a PACS is the actual cost of the equipment. Current service and assistance charges can easily exceed the initial cost of the purchase price over a 5-year period of worthless. Since virtually all imaging purchases are made regularly with service contracts, most PACS are purchased with service contracts. The problem is that, in more than 95% of cases, no PACS service agreement is required. Alternatives for not buying a service contract are actually more than one might imagine. As mentioned above, buying software support for a PACS should be obvious and as absolute as the decision to have a PACS administrator.

Expect to pay between 4 and 6% of the total list of systems for pure software support if the provider offers a complete package (material and software) or between 12% and 14% of the price of pure software for pure software support. They should also seriously consider a separate service agreement on computer X-ray systems if they are part of the purchase of PACS, as these are specialized modalities. Similarly, the cost-effectiveness of service agreements seems to defy logic. If the maximum allowable downtime is actually 77 hours per year (99% operating time), why would a facility want or spend 14% or 16% of the system list price to guarantee that operating time? If you even charge 77 hours at $500 per hour, this equates to less than $40,000 per year in authorized service charges before the creditor is late with his operating time guarantee.

CatégoriesNon classé