Advertisement

Introduction to Telepathology

  • Michael B. Smith
Chapter
  • 1.2k Downloads
Part of the Health Informatics book series (HI)

Abstract

The practice of medicine has been subject to economic, social, scientific, and technological forces that have altered the practice of the profession over the last several decades. In many cases, pressures have been applied by forces that have seemingly contradictory goals. Economic forces applied by the evolution of managed care have led to a reorganization of the medical infrastructure in the United States, which have resulted in increasing numbers of patients for individual providers to care for and the unavailability of medical care to larger and larger segments of the population. Concurrently, medicine has been under constant pressure, from both inside and outside the profession to find a way to care for the medically underserved, not only those created by the economic restructuring, but those who were underserved in the past, such as the geographically remote. While the appeasement of contradictory forces and pressures on priorities in medicine at a national level are a laborious, complicated process involving many social, economic, and philosophical issues, medical practitioners are having to deal with the problem of providing care to more and more patients dispersed over a greater and greater geographic area on a daily basis. Pathology by its nature has been particularly prone to the pressures and problems of centralized care. Fortunately, advancements in the technology of telecommunications and computer science have offered practitioners an effective option in dealing with this problem.

Keywords

Local Area Network Asynchronous Transfer Mode Joint Photographic Expert Group Lossless Compression Image Compression Algorithm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brecht RM, Barrett JE. Telemedicine in the United States. In: Dunn K, Viegas, SF, editors. Telemedicine: Practicing in the Information Age. Philadelphia, Lippincott- Raven, 1998Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weinstein RS. Telepathology comes of age in Norway. Hum Pathol 1991; 22:511–513PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weinstein LJ, Epstein JI, Edlow D, et al. Static image analysis of skin specimens: The appHcation of telepathology to frozen section evaluation. Hum Pathol 1997; 28:30–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nordrum I, Engum B, Rinde E, et al. Remote frozen section service: At telepathology project in northern Norway. Hum Pathol 1991; 22:514–518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weinstein RS, Bhattacharyya AK, Graham AR, et al. Telepathology: A ten-year progress report. Hum Pathol 1997; 28:1–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dunn BE, Almagro UA, Choi H, et al. Dynamic-robotic telepathology: Department of Veterans Affairs feasibility study. Hum Pathol 1997; 28:8–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weinberg DS. How is telepathology being used to improve patient care? Clin Chem 1996; 42:831–835.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mun SK, Elasayed AM, Tohme WG, et al. Teleradiology/telepathology requirements and implementation. J Med Sys 1995; 19:153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Winokur S, McCleelan S, Siegal GP, et al. A prospective trial of telepathology for intraoperative consultation (frozen sections). Hum Pathol 2000; 31:781–785PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weinberg DS, Doolittle M. Image management in pathology. Am J Clin Pathol 1996; 105(Suppl 1):S54-S59PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    O’Brien MJ, Takahashi M, Brugal G, et al. Digital imagery/telecytology: lAC task force summary. Acta Cytologica 1998; 42:148–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Balis U. Image output technology. Clin Lab Med 1997; 17:175–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Doolittle MH, Doolittle KW, Winkelman Z, et al. Color images in telepathology: How many colors do we need? Hum Pathol 1997; 28:36–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klossa J, Cordier JC, Flandrin G, et al. A European de facto standard for image folders apphed to telepathology and teaching. Int J Med Informatics 1998; 48:207–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Winokur TS, McClellan S, Siegal GP, et al. An initial trial of a prototype telepathology system featuring static imaging with discrete control of the remote microscope. Am J ClinPathol 1998; 110:43–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhou J, Hogarth MA, Walters RF, et al. Hybrid system for telepathology. Hum Pathol 2000; 31:826–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vazir MH, Loane MA, Wooton R. A pilot study of low-cost dynamic telepathology using the public telephone network. J Telemed Telecare 1998; 4:168–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Singson PC, Natarajan S, Greenson JK, et al. Virtual microscopy and the internet as telepathology consultation tools. Am J Pathol 1999; 111:792–795Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Delia Mea V, Cataldi P, Boi S, et al. Image selection in static telepathology through the Internet. J Telemed Telecare 1998; 4(Suppl. l):20–22Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weinstein MH, Epstein JI. Telepathology diagnosis of prostate needle biopsies. Hum Pathol 1997; 28:22–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ziol M, Vacher-Lavenu M, Heudes D. Expert consultation for cervical carcinoma smears: Reliabihty of selected-field videomicroscopy. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1999; 21:35–41Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Delia Mea V, Beltram CA. Telepathology applications of the Internet multimedia electronic mail. Med Informatics 1998; 23:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weinberg DS, Allaert FA, Dusserre P, et al. Telepathology diagnosis by means of digital still images: An international validation study. Hum Pathol 1996; 27:111–118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Raab SS, Zaleski MS, Thomas PA, et al. Telecytology. Am J Clin Pathol 1996; 105:599–603PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Halliday B, Bhattacharyya AK, Graham AR, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of an international static-imaging telepathology consultation service. Hum Pathol 1997; 28:17–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eusebi V, Foschini L, Erde S, et al. Transcontinental consults in surgical pathology via the Internet. Hum Pathol 1997; 28:13–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dawson PJ, Johnson JG, Edgemon LJ, et al. Outpatient frozen sections by telepathology in a Veteran’s Administration Medical Center. Hum Pathol 2000; 31:786–788.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nagata H, Mizushima H. World wide microscope: New concept of Internet telepathology microscope and implementation of the prototype. In: Cesnik, B, et al., editors. MEDINFO 98. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 1998:286–289Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Petersen I, Wolf G, Roth K. Telepathology by the Internet. J Pathol 2000; 191:8–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Frishmann R. Telemedicine healers in cyberspace. Harvard Health Letter 1997:9–12Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    American Medical Association. H-480.969: The promotion of quality telemedicine [Online]. 1999. Available: http://www.ama-assn.org/cmeselec/cmeres/cme-7-l.htmGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Federation of State Medical Boards. A model act to regulate the practice of medicine across state lines [Online]. 1996. Available: URL:http://www.fsmb.org/telemed.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bargnesi JM, Naegely EC. Telemedicine: Will technology expand medical liability? [Online] 1998. Available: http://www.damonmorey.com.pubs/autumn98_lc.htmlGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Miller NW. Telemedicine legalities for physicians in PA [Online]. Physician’s News Digest 1999. Available: URL:http://www.physiciansnews.com/law/699miller.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Titus, K. Labs making leap to telepathology. CAP Today 1997; 11:1Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Office for the Advancement of Telehealth. Telemedicine reimbursement. [Online] 1998. Available: http://telehealth.hrsa.gov/reimb.htmGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    American Telemedicine Association Special Interest Group for Telepathology. Clinical guidelines for telepathology: A draft version 2.4 [Online]. Available: http://telepathology.upmc.edu/ata/guidelineGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mairinger T, Netzer TT, Schoner W, et al. Pathologists’ attitudes to implementing telepathology. J Telemed Telecare 1998; 4:41–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dervan PA, Wooton R. Diagnostic telepathology. Histopathol 1998; 32:195–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael B. Smith

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations