4 8 S U P P L E M E N T T O O U T P A T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E M A R C H 2 0 1 7
the surgeon can view them on a
high-resolution monitor. The
surgeon can then have a direct
conversation with pathology
without leaving the patient's
side and circle a piece of tissue
on the monitor — much like a
football television commentator
would do with a telestrator —
while asking, "What about this
spot here?" It's easy to see how this kind of progress can save time, improve
accuracy and, in the end, provide the patient with better care.
3. Work with a single vendor
As part of our due diligence, we visited a number of other hospitals that had
successfully integrated their ORs. Some of the administrators we met said work-
ing with multiple vendors — one for surgical displays, one for video and one for
integrated various technologies, for example — could result in finger pointing
instead of collaboration if the project doesn't progress as planned.
We wound up vetting 3 different integration vendors. Because we're a state
hospital, we had to get proposals from multiple vendors and put the project out
to bid. Cost, support, ease of use and accountability were key considerations,
but the feedback we got from those hospital visits confirmed our decision to
work with a single vendor. Our integration vendor also manufactures OR equip-
ment, so the company provided a central point of contact for everything we
needed to integrate the ORs, with an exceptional service package to boot.
We also looked for ways to save money when vetting vendors. Our vendor's
video equipment is backwards compatible, meaning it will work with a camera
made 10 years ago or 10 years from now. That backwards compatibility made a
huge difference in terms of cost-savings; it essentially means we'll invest in
• FAR REACHING OR integration feeds clinically relevant information from dif-
ferent departments directly to the OR — all without disrupting the sterile field.
The
Ohio
State
University
Comprehensive
Cancer
Center
