Abaxis and Imagyst represent distinct approaches to veterinary diagnostics. Abaxis, now a part of Zoetis, offers in-clinic hematology, serum chemistry, and electrolyte analyzers providing rapid results. These analyzers are typically compact and designed for use at the point of care. Imagyst, conversely, provides artificial intelligence (AI)-powered diagnostic support for veterinary radiographs. Their platform assists clinicians in interpreting X-rays by identifying potential pathologies and offering diagnostic insights. Consequently, one system performs laboratory testing while the other assists in image interpretation.
The divergence in these diagnostic tools signifies a broader trend in veterinary medicine: the increasing adoption of specialized technologies. Rapid in-house results from analyzers like those formerly offered by Abaxis enable quicker treatment decisions, particularly in critical situations. AI-driven image analysis platforms like Imagyst aim to enhance diagnostic accuracy and efficiency by providing clinicians with a second opinion and assisting in complex cases. The combined utilization of such technologies offers the potential for improved patient outcomes through faster diagnosis and more informed treatment strategies.
This discussion will further explore the specific features, advantages, and limitations of each technology, including their respective roles within a modern veterinary practice. Considerations regarding cost, required training, and integration with existing workflows will also be addressed.
1. Modality
The core difference between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst lies in their respective diagnostic modalities: bloodwork analysis versus medical imaging. This fundamental distinction dictates the type of information each system provides and how it contributes to patient care. Understanding this difference is crucial for interpreting and integrating the results obtained from each system.
-
Laboratory Analysis (Abaxis/Zoetis)
Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers perform in-clinic bloodwork analysis, providing quantitative data on various blood components. These analyzers measure hematological parameters (e.g., complete blood count) and biochemical markers (e.g., liver enzymes, electrolytes). This information is essential for assessing organ function, diagnosing infections, and monitoring overall health. The immediacy of results allows for rapid clinical decision-making, especially in critical cases.
-
Radiographic Imaging (Imagyst)
Imagyst focuses on analyzing radiographic images, using artificial intelligence to assist in the detection and interpretation of anatomical abnormalities. This technology enhances the diagnostic process by providing an additional layer of analysis, potentially identifying subtle lesions or patterns that might be overlooked during initial review. Imagyst’s focus on imaging provides crucial information about the structure and integrity of bones, organs, and tissues, which complements the physiological insights gained from bloodwork.
-
Complementary Nature of the Modalities
While distinct, these modalities are often used in conjunction. For instance, abnormal bloodwork results may indicate the need for further investigation through imaging. Conversely, radiographic findings might prompt specific blood tests to confirm or refine a diagnosis. The combined use of these modalities provides a more comprehensive understanding of a patient’s condition.
-
Practical Implications for Veterinary Practice
The different modalities influence how each system is incorporated into veterinary practice. In-house blood analyzers offer rapid results at the point of care, whereas Imagyst requires image upload and analysis, which may introduce a slight delay depending on connectivity. Understanding these practical considerations is vital for efficient workflow integration and optimizing patient management.
The contrasting modalities of bloodwork analysis and medical imaging highlight the distinct roles that Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst play in veterinary diagnostics. Their complementary nature allows for a more thorough assessment of patient health, leading to more informed clinical decisions and improved patient care.
2. Technology
A core distinction between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst lies in the underlying technologies employed: traditional laboratory analyzer versus artificial intelligence. This technological divergence significantly impacts how results are generated, interpreted, and applied within veterinary diagnostics. Examining these technological differences is essential to understanding the strengths and limitations of each system and their respective roles in patient care.
-
Laboratory Analyzers (Abaxis/Zoetis)
Abaxis/Zoetis utilizes established laboratory analyzer technology based on established chemical and physical principles. These analyzers employ techniques like spectrophotometry, impedance, and potentiometry to quantify various blood components. These established methodologies offer reliable and consistent results. The technology is well-understood, providing clinicians with familiar and readily interpretable data. However, it requires dedicated instrumentation and specific reagents for each analysis.
-
Artificial Intelligence (Imagyst)
Imagyst leverages artificial intelligence, specifically machine learning algorithms, to analyze radiographic images. These algorithms are trained on vast datasets of labeled radiographs, enabling them to recognize patterns and identify potential abnormalities. AI offers the potential for increased diagnostic sensitivity and efficiency by assisting clinicians in identifying subtle lesions. However, AI algorithms require extensive training data and ongoing validation to ensure accuracy and reliability. Results are also influenced by image quality and the specific algorithms employed. Imagyst relies on access to sufficient computing power and digital infrastructure, such as reliable internet connectivity for cloud-based processing.
-
Data Output and Interpretation
The technology employed dictates the type of data generated and how it is interpreted. Abaxis analyzers produce numerical data representing the concentration of various blood components, which clinicians interpret based on established reference ranges. Imagyst, on the other hand, provides visual overlays on radiographic images, highlighting areas of potential concern and offering diagnostic suggestions. While Abaxis results are directly interpreted by clinicians, Imagyst acts as a support tool, enhancing image interpretation but not replacing clinical judgment.
-
Impact on Workflow and Clinical Decision-Making
The differing technologies influence workflow and clinical decision-making. Abaxis analyzers offer rapid, on-site results, facilitating timely interventions. Imagyst’s AI-driven analysis can expedite image interpretation, but requires image upload and processing time, which can vary depending on internet speed and image size. Understanding these practical considerations is crucial for integrating these technologies effectively within the veterinary practice.
The contrast between established analyzer technology and emerging artificial intelligence underscores the fundamental differences between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst. These distinct technologies provide complementary diagnostic information, each with its strengths and limitations. Recognizing these differences enables clinicians to effectively utilize these tools to enhance patient care.
3. Output
A critical distinction between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst lies in the nature of their output: numerical data versus image analysis. This difference reflects the fundamental disparity in their diagnostic approaches and directly contributes to understanding the broader question of “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results.” Abaxis analyzers yield quantitative numerical data representing concentrations of blood components, such as red blood cells, white blood cells, electrolytes, and enzymes. These data points provide specific measurements used to assess organ function, detect infections, and monitor overall physiological status. Conversely, Imagyst produces qualitative image analysis results by identifying and highlighting potential pathologies within radiographic images. This output assists clinicians in visualizing and interpreting anatomical structures, aiding in the detection of skeletal fractures, soft tissue lesions, or other abnormalities. The distinction is crucial because it dictates how clinicians interpret and utilize the information. Numerical data from Abaxis provides concrete measurements for immediate clinical decision-making, while Imagyst’s image analysis supports a more nuanced interpretation of anatomical structures, facilitating a deeper understanding of underlying conditions.
Consider a case of suspected kidney disease. An Abaxis analyzer might reveal elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine levels, providing quantitative evidence of impaired kidney function. Imagyst, analyzing a radiograph of the kidneys, could then identify reduced kidney size or the presence of cysts, offering visual confirmation and further insight into the nature of the kidney disease. In another scenario, a suspected fracture might not be readily apparent on initial radiographic review. Imagyst’s AI-driven analysis could highlight a subtle hairline fracture, directing the clinician’s attention to a critical finding that might otherwise be missed. This distinction in output precise numerical data versus visually enhanced image analysis underscores the complementary nature of these diagnostic tools.
Understanding the difference in output between numerical data and image analysis is essential for effectively integrating Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst within a veterinary practice. Numerical data allows for immediate, objective assessment of physiological parameters, while image analysis provides crucial anatomical context. This combined approach enhances diagnostic accuracy, improves clinical decision-making, and ultimately contributes to more comprehensive patient care. The contrasting nature of the output underscores the core differences between these diagnostic platforms and answers the crucial question of how their results differ, leading to more informed and effective veterinary practice.
4. Application
A key differentiator between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst lies in their application within a veterinary setting: in-clinic versus cloud-based. This distinction significantly impacts workflow, turnaround time for results, and the overall integration of these diagnostic tools into practice. Understanding the application context is crucial for appreciating the practical implications and answering the overarching question of “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results.”
-
Point-of-Care Diagnostics (Abaxis/Zoetis)
Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers are designed for in-clinic, point-of-care use. This allows for immediate processing and analysis of blood samples, providing rapid results that facilitate timely treatment decisions. In critical situations, this immediate availability of data can be life-saving. The in-clinic application simplifies workflow, minimizing the need for external laboratory services and reducing potential delays associated with sample transportation. However, in-clinic application requires dedicated equipment maintenance, quality control procedures, and staff training.
-
Cloud-Based Analysis (Imagyst)
Imagyst utilizes a cloud-based platform for image analysis. Radiographic images are uploaded to Imagyst’s servers, where AI algorithms perform the analysis. This cloud-based approach offers several advantages, including accessibility from any location with internet connectivity, scalability to handle large datasets, and automatic software updates. However, reliance on internet connectivity can be a limitation in areas with poor or unreliable internet service. The cloud-based nature also introduces data security and privacy considerations that must be addressed.
-
Workflow Integration
The different application models influence how each system integrates into practice workflow. Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers provide a streamlined in-house workflow for blood analysis, minimizing turnaround time. Imagyst’s cloud-based system necessitates image acquisition, upload, and analysis steps, which can introduce a delay depending on internet speed and image size. Practices must consider their existing infrastructure and workflow when choosing between these diagnostic tools. The in-clinic or cloud-based nature also affects costs. Abaxis/Zoetis involves upfront equipment purchase and ongoing reagent costs while Imagyst operates on a subscription or per-analysis fee structure.
-
Data Management and Accessibility
Data management and accessibility differ significantly between the two systems. Results from Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers are typically stored locally or integrated into practice management software. Imagyst’s cloud-based platform provides centralized data storage and access to historical records, facilitating case review and long-term monitoring. However, data security and privacy become critical concerns with cloud-based solutions. Both systems can be valuable for educational purposes in veterinary settings by allowing analysis comparisons or demonstrating disease processes over time. Imagyst’s visual outputs are particularly useful for training purposes, allowing for clearer understanding of complex radiographic findings.
The in-clinic versus cloud-based application distinction highlights the practical differences between Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst. This difference influences workflow, turnaround time, cost considerations, and data management strategies. Understanding these application-specific nuances provides a more complete understanding of “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results” and enables informed decisions regarding their integration into veterinary practices, leading to more efficient and effective patient care.
5. Speed
A critical factor differentiating Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst involves the speed of result delivery: rapid, on-site results versus results dependent on internet connectivity. This distinction significantly impacts clinical workflow and the timeliness of treatment decisions, contributing substantially to understanding the core differences between the two systems.
-
Immediate Results (Abaxis/Zoetis)
Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers provide immediate, on-site results within minutes of sample collection. This rapid turnaround time is crucial for prompt diagnosis and treatment, especially in critical cases or emergency settings. The immediacy of results eliminates delays associated with external laboratory processing or sample transportation, allowing clinicians to make informed decisions quickly. For instance, in a case of acute abdominal pain, rapid bloodwork analysis can differentiate between pancreatitis and a surgical emergency, enabling faster intervention.
-
Connectivity-Dependent Results (Imagyst)
Imagyst’s reliance on cloud-based processing introduces a dependency on internet connectivity. While image analysis itself can be relatively quick, the overall turnaround time includes image upload and download speeds, which are contingent on internet bandwidth. In areas with reliable high-speed internet, the delay might be minimal. However, in areas with limited or unreliable connectivity, delays can hinder timely diagnosis. This dependency becomes particularly relevant in rural practices or emergency situations where rapid image interpretation is essential.
-
Impact on Clinical Workflow
The difference in speed significantly impacts clinical workflow. Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers streamline the diagnostic process by providing immediate results, minimizing interruptions and maximizing efficiency. Imagyst’s cloud-based approach, while offering convenience and accessibility, introduces an additional step that can impact workflow depending on internet connectivity. Practices must consider their internet infrastructure and typical caseload when assessing the potential impact of Imagyst’s connectivity dependence on their workflow. Imagyst may be more efficient for interpreting larger volumes of complex images in a less time-sensitive setting, potentially reducing the workload on veterinary radiologists or specialists.
-
Practical Considerations for Time-Sensitive Cases
In time-sensitive cases, the difference in speed becomes paramount. Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers offer a clear advantage when immediate results are crucial for patient stabilization or determining the next course of action. While Imagyst can provide valuable diagnostic support, the potential for connectivity-related delays must be carefully considered, especially when dealing with critical patients. In such cases, alternative diagnostic imaging interpretation methods may need to be readily available as a backup. The rapid availability of Abaxis results contributes to quicker triage and potentially reduces patient morbidity and mortality in critical cases.
The contrast between rapid, on-site results and connectivity-dependent analysis highlights a fundamental difference between Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst. This speed disparity impacts clinical workflow, the timeliness of treatment decisions, and ultimately, patient outcomes. Understanding this key distinction is essential when considering the practical application of these technologies within a veterinary setting, providing a clearer understanding of “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results” and their respective roles in optimizing patient care.
6. Interpretation
A crucial distinction between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst lies in how results are interpreted: direct clinician interpretation versus AI-assisted interpretation. This difference significantly impacts the diagnostic process, influencing speed, accuracy, and the role of the veterinarian. Understanding this distinction is essential for answering the fundamental question of “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results” and how these differences impact clinical practice.
-
Direct Interpretation (Abaxis/Zoetis)
Results from Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers are directly interpreted by the clinician. The analyzer provides numerical data representing various blood parameters, which are then compared to established reference intervals. This direct interpretation allows for immediate assessment and rapid decision-making. The clinician’s experience and clinical judgment play a crucial role in contextualizing the results and integrating them with other clinical findings. For example, elevated white blood cell count may suggest infection, but the clinician must consider other factors, such as patient history and physical exam findings, to arrive at a definitive diagnosis.
-
AI-Assisted Interpretation (Imagyst)
Imagyst offers AI-assisted interpretation of radiographic images. The AI algorithms identify potential abnormalities and provide visual overlays highlighting areas of concern. This assists clinicians in detecting subtle lesions or patterns that might be overlooked during initial review. While the AI provides valuable support, the final interpretation remains the responsibility of the clinician. The AI acts as a second opinion, enhancing diagnostic accuracy but not replacing clinical judgment. For instance, Imagyst might highlight a potential lung nodule on a radiograph, but the clinician must evaluate the finding in conjunction with patient history, other imaging modalities, and potentially, cytology or biopsy results to determine its significance.
-
Impact on Diagnostic Accuracy and Efficiency
Both direct and AI-assisted interpretation methods have implications for diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. Direct interpretation relies on the clinician’s expertise and experience, potentially subject to inter-observer variability. AI-assisted interpretation can enhance accuracy by identifying subtle findings and providing quantitative assessments, reducing the potential for human error. However, AI algorithms are not infallible and can be influenced by image quality and the specific algorithms employed. The combination of direct clinician interpretation and AI assistance offers the potential to maximize diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. Imagyst can help prioritize cases for specialist review, streamlining workflow and ensuring that complex cases receive appropriate attention.
-
Role of the Veterinarian
The interpretation method impacts the veterinarian’s role in the diagnostic process. With direct interpretation, the veterinarian plays a central role in analyzing and contextualizing the data. AI-assisted interpretation provides support but does not diminish the importance of clinical judgment. The veterinarian remains responsible for integrating the AI’s findings with other clinical information and making the final diagnostic and treatment decisions. AI serves as a tool to augment, not replace, the veterinarian’s expertise. Ultimately, a successful diagnostic process relies on the integration of technology and clinical judgment, not the replacement of one by the other.
The distinction between direct and AI-assisted interpretation is crucial for understanding “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results.” This difference impacts workflow, the role of the clinician, and ultimately, patient outcomes. While Abaxis/Zoetis empowers direct, immediate interpretation of bloodwork data, Imagyst provides valuable support for interpreting complex radiographic images. Recognizing the strengths and limitations of each approach allows for effective integration of these technologies to enhance diagnostic accuracy and improve patient care. The symbiotic relationship between technology and clinician expertise remains paramount in the pursuit of optimal patient health.
7. Focus
A fundamental distinction between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst lies in their respective diagnostic foci: physiological versus anatomical. This core difference directly addresses the central question of “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results” and highlights the complementary nature of these diagnostic modalities. Abaxis analyzers, focusing on physiological parameters, provide insights into organ function and overall health status by quantifying blood components. These measurements reflect the body’s internal biochemical and cellular environment, providing crucial information about metabolic processes, immune response, and organ-specific function. Elevated liver enzymes, for instance, might indicate liver dysfunction, while changes in electrolyte levels can signal dehydration or kidney problems. This focus on physiological data allows for assessment of the body’s internal state and identification of potential systemic imbalances.
Imagyst, conversely, focuses on anatomical structures. By analyzing radiographic images, Imagyst assists in identifying structural abnormalities, such as fractures, tumors, or organ enlargement. This anatomical focus provides crucial information about the physical integrity of tissues and organs, complementing the physiological insights gained from Abaxis. For example, while Abaxis results might reveal elevated kidney values, Imagyst can pinpoint the presence of kidney stones or structural abnormalities contributing to the dysfunction. In a case of lameness, Abaxis results could indicate inflammation, but Imagyst could reveal the exact location and nature of a bone fracture, guiding treatment decisions. This combined approachphysiological data from Abaxis coupled with anatomical detail from Imagystprovides a more comprehensive picture of a patient’s condition. A dog presenting with vomiting, for instance, might have elevated pancreatic enzymes on an Abaxis analysis. Imagyst analysis of abdominal radiographs could reveal evidence of pancreatitis or a foreign body obstruction, further clarifying the underlying cause.
The distinction between physiological and anatomical foci highlights the complementary roles of Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst in veterinary diagnostics. Abaxis provides immediate, quantitative data about the body’s internal workings, while Imagyst offers detailed visualizations of anatomical structures. Integrating both perspectives allows for a more thorough understanding of disease processes and guides more informed clinical decisions. This combined approach is crucial for effective diagnosis, treatment, and ultimately, improved patient outcomes. The distinct foci of these diagnostic modalities are essential components in answering “what’s the difference between Abaxis vs. Imagyst results,” demonstrating their complementary nature and underscoring their combined value in veterinary practice.
Frequently Asked Questions
This section addresses common inquiries regarding the differences between Abaxis (now a part of Zoetis) and Imagyst diagnostic platforms, clarifying their distinct roles and functionalities within veterinary medicine.
Question 1: Can Imagyst replace traditional bloodwork analysis performed by Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers?
No. Imagyst focuses on radiographic image analysis, providing anatomical insights, while Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers offer physiological data through bloodwork analysis. These are distinct diagnostic modalities that often complement each other rather than serving as replacements.
Question 2: How quickly are results available from each system?
Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers provide results within minutes, enabling rapid, on-site decision-making. Imagyst’s turnaround time depends on image upload speed and internet connectivity, potentially introducing a delay.
Question 3: What types of clinical insights can be gained from each system?
Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers offer quantitative data on blood parameters, aiding in assessing organ function, electrolyte balance, and detecting infections. Imagyst assists in identifying anatomical abnormalities within radiographs, such as fractures, tumors, or organ enlargement.
Question 4: Who interprets the results from each system?
Clinicians directly interpret results from Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers, comparing numerical data to reference intervals. Imagyst provides AI-assisted image analysis, highlighting potential abnormalities, but the final interpretation remains the clinician’s responsibility.
Question 5: What are the primary advantages of each system?
Abaxis/Zoetis offers rapid, on-site results, facilitating timely interventions. Imagyst enhances diagnostic accuracy by providing a second opinion on radiographic interpretations, potentially identifying subtle lesions.
Question 6: How do these systems integrate into a typical veterinary practice?
Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers provide a streamlined in-house workflow for blood analysis. Imagyst’s cloud-based platform requires image upload and internet connectivity, offering accessibility but introducing potential connectivity-related delays. Integrating both systems provides comprehensive diagnostic capabilities, combining physiological and anatomical insights.
Understanding the distinct functionalities and applications of Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst allows clinicians to leverage these technologies effectively for enhanced patient care. The complementary nature of these diagnostic tools offers a more complete understanding of patient health, enabling more accurate diagnoses and informed treatment decisions.
The following section delves into specific case studies, illustrating the practical application and combined use of these diagnostic modalities in various clinical scenarios.
Maximizing Diagnostic Insights
This section offers practical guidance on effectively utilizing Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst platforms, maximizing their diagnostic potential within a veterinary setting.
Tip 1: Integrate Both Modalities for Comprehensive Assessment: Employing both bloodwork analysis (Abaxis/Zoetis) and radiographic image analysis (Imagyst) provides a more complete understanding of a patient’s condition. Physiological data complements anatomical findings, enabling more accurate diagnoses.
Tip 2: Prioritize Cases for Imagyst Analysis: While Imagyst can analyze any radiograph, prioritize cases with complex or ambiguous findings. This maximizes the benefit of AI-assisted interpretation, focusing resources where they are most impactful.
Tip 3: Ensure High-Quality Radiographs for Imagyst: Image quality directly impacts the accuracy of Imagyst’s analysis. Adhering to proper radiographic techniques, including appropriate positioning and exposure, ensures optimal image clarity for reliable AI interpretation.
Tip 4: Utilize Abaxis/Zoetis for Rapid Triage: In critical situations or emergency settings, leverage the speed of Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers. Rapid bloodwork results facilitate immediate triage and guide initial stabilization efforts while awaiting further diagnostics.
Tip 5: Consider Internet Connectivity for Imagyst: Imagyst’s cloud-based platform requires reliable internet access. Evaluate internet bandwidth and reliability to ensure timely image upload and analysis, especially in time-sensitive situations.
Tip 6: Contextualize Results with Patient History and Physical Exam: Integrate diagnostic results from both platforms with patient history, physical exam findings, and other diagnostic modalities. This holistic approach ensures accurate and comprehensive patient assessments.
Tip 7: Maintain Proficiency in Traditional Interpretation Methods: While AI-assisted tools like Imagyst offer valuable support, maintain proficiency in traditional radiographic interpretation. AI augments, not replaces, clinical expertise.
Tip 8: Leverage Educational Resources for Both Platforms: Utilize available training materials and resources to optimize the use of both Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst systems. Continuing education ensures proficiency and maximizes the diagnostic value gained from each platform.
By implementing these tips, veterinary professionals can effectively leverage both Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst technologies, optimizing diagnostic accuracy, improving clinical workflow, and ultimately, enhancing patient care.
The following conclusion summarizes the key takeaways and reinforces the value of integrating these distinct diagnostic modalities within a modern veterinary practice.
Understanding the Difference Between Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst Results
The distinction between Abaxis (now Zoetis) and Imagyst results represents a pivotal concept in modern veterinary diagnostics. This exploration has highlighted the core differences, stemming from their distinct modalities, technologies, and applications. Abaxis/Zoetis analyzers provide rapid, in-clinic bloodwork analysis, offering immediate physiological insights. Imagyst, conversely, leverages AI-powered image analysis to enhance radiographic interpretation, focusing on anatomical structures. The key differences lie not only in what they analyze but also in how results are delivered and interpreted, influencing clinical workflow and decision-making. Understanding these core distinctionsnumerical data versus image analysis, rapid on-site results versus connectivity-dependent processing, and direct versus AI-assisted interpretationis paramount for effective utilization.
The future of veterinary diagnostics lies in the strategic integration of diverse technologies. The complementary nature of Abaxis/Zoetis and Imagyst underscores the power of combining physiological and anatomical data for a more comprehensive understanding of patient health. Embracing these advancements empowers veterinary professionals to provide more accurate diagnoses, implement more effective treatment strategies, and ultimately, deliver superior patient care.
