Interpretation time efficiency with radiographs: a comparison study between standard 6 and 12 MP high-resolution display monitors.

IF 1.9 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

Journal of Medical Imaging Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-22 DOI:10.1117/1.JMI.11.3.035502

Mostafa Abozeed, Kevin Junck, Seth Lirette, Tom Kimpe, Albert Xthona, Srini Tridandapani, Jordan Perchik

{"title":"Interpretation time efficiency with radiographs: a comparison study between standard 6 and 12 MP high-resolution display monitors.","authors":"Mostafa Abozeed, Kevin Junck, Seth Lirette, Tom Kimpe, Albert Xthona, Srini Tridandapani, Jordan Perchik","doi":"10.1117/1.JMI.11.3.035502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare interpretation efficiency of radiologists reading radiographs on 6 megapixel (MP) versus 12 MP monitors.Approach: Our method compares two sets of monitors in two phases: in phase I, radiologists interpreted using a 6 MP, 30.4 in. (Barco Coronis Fusion) and in phase II, a 12 MP, 30.9 in. (Barco Nio Fusion). Nine chest and three musculoskeletal radiologists each batch interpreted an average of 115 radiographs in phase I and 115 radiographs in phase II as a part of routine clinical work. Radiologists were blinded to monitor resolution.Results: Interpretation times per radiograph were noted from dictation logs. Interpretation time was significantly decreased utilizing a 12 MP monitor by 6.88 s ( <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.002</mn></mrow> </math> ) and 6.76 s (8.7%) ( <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo><</mo> <mn>0.001</mn></mrow> </math> ) for chest radiographs only and combined chest and musculoskeletal radiographs, respectively. When evaluating musculoskeletal radiographs alone, the improvement in reading times with 12 MP monitor was 6.76 s, however, this difference was not statistically significant ( <math><mrow><mi>p</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.111</mn></mrow> </math> ). Interpretation of radiographs on 12 MP monitors was 8.7% faster than on 6 MP monitors.Conclusion: Higher resolution diagnostic displays can enable radiologists to interpret radiographs more efficiently.","PeriodicalId":47707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging","volume":"11 3","pages":"035502"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11193489/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.11.3.035502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare interpretation efficiency of radiologists reading radiographs on 6 megapixel (MP) versus 12 MP monitors.

Approach: Our method compares two sets of monitors in two phases: in phase I, radiologists interpreted using a 6 MP, 30.4 in. (Barco Coronis Fusion) and in phase II, a 12 MP, 30.9 in. (Barco Nio Fusion). Nine chest and three musculoskeletal radiologists each batch interpreted an average of 115 radiographs in phase I and 115 radiographs in phase II as a part of routine clinical work. Radiologists were blinded to monitor resolution.

Results: Interpretation times per radiograph were noted from dictation logs. Interpretation time was significantly decreased utilizing a 12 MP monitor by 6.88 s ( $p = 0.002$ ) and 6.76 s (8.7%) ( $p < 0.001$ ) for chest radiographs only and combined chest and musculoskeletal radiographs, respectively. When evaluating musculoskeletal radiographs alone, the improvement in reading times with 12 MP monitor was 6.76 s, however, this difference was not statistically significant ( $p = 0.111$ ). Interpretation of radiographs on 12 MP monitors was 8.7% faster than on 6 MP monitors.

Conclusion: Higher resolution diagnostic displays can enable radiologists to interpret radiographs more efficiently.

查看原文本刊更多论文

X 光片的解读时间效率：标准 6 MP 和 12 MP 高分辨率显示屏的对比研究。

目的：本研究的目的是比较放射科医生在 600 万像素和 1200 万像素显示器上阅读 X 光片的判读效率：我们的方法分两个阶段对两套监视器进行比较：在第一阶段，放射医师使用 6 兆像素、30.4 英寸（Barco Coronis Fusion）监视器进行判读；在第二阶段，使用 12 兆像素、30.9 英寸（Barco Nio Fusion）监视器进行判读。作为常规临床工作的一部分，9 名胸部放射科医生和 3 名肌肉骨骼放射科医生平均每批在第一阶段和第二阶段分别解读了 115 张射线照片。放射科医生在监测分辨率方面是盲人：结果：根据口述日志记录了每张 X 光片的判读时间。使用 12 MP 监视器后，仅胸部 X 光片的判读时间明显缩短了 6.88 秒（p = 0.002），而仅胸部和肌肉骨骼联合 X 光片的判读时间则分别缩短了 6.76 秒（8.7%）（p 0.001）。在单独评估肌肉骨骼 X 光片时，使用 12 MP 监视器的读片时间缩短了 6.76 秒，但这一差异没有统计学意义（P = 0.111）。使用 1200 万像素显示器判读射线照片比使用 600 万像素显示器快 8.7%：结论：更高分辨率的诊断显示器能让放射医师更高效地解读射线照片。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Medical Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-

CiteScore

4.10

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： JMI covers fundamental and translational research, as well as applications, focused on medical imaging, which continue to yield physical and biomedical advancements in the early detection, diagnostics, and therapy of disease as well as in the understanding of normal. The scope of JMI includes: Imaging physics, Tomographic reconstruction algorithms (such as those in CT and MRI), Image processing and deep learning, Computer-aided diagnosis and quantitative image analysis, Visualization and modeling, Picture archiving and communications systems (PACS), Image perception and observer performance, Technology assessment, Ultrasonic imaging, Image-guided procedures, Digital pathology, Biomedical applications of biomedical imaging. JMI allows for the peer-reviewed communication and archiving of scientific developments, translational and clinical applications, reviews, and recommendations for the field.