Personal Computer versus Workstation Display: Observer Performance in Detection of Wrist Fractures on Digital Radiographs1

Middlemore Hospital, Окленд, Auckland, New Zealand
Radiology (Impact Factor: 6.21). 01/2006; 237(3):872-7. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2373041439
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To retrospectively compare the accuracy of observer performance with personal computer (PC) compared with that with dedicated picture archiving and communication system (PACS) workstation display in the detection of wrist fractures on computed radiographs.
This study was conducted according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (2002 version) of the World Medical Association. The institutional clinical board approved the study; informed consent was not required. Seven observers independently assessed randomized anonymous digital radiographs of the wrist from 259 subjects; 146 had fractures, and 113 were healthy control subjects (151 male and 108 female subjects; average age, 33 years). Follow-up radiographs and/or computed tomographic scans were used as the reference standard for patients with fractures, and follow-up radiographs and/or clinical history data were used as the reference standard for controls. The PC was a standard hospital machine with a 17-inch (43-cm) color monitor with which Web browser display software was used. The PACS workstation had two portrait 21-inch (53-cm) monochrome monitors that displayed 2300 lines. The observers assigned scores to the radiographs on a scale of 1 (no fracture) to 5 (definite fracture). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were compared.
The areas under the ROC curves were almost identical for the PC and workstation (0.910 vs 0.918, respectively; difference, 0.008; 95% confidence interval: -0.029, 0.013). The average sensitivity with the PC was almost identical to that with the workstation (85% vs 84%, respectively), as was the average specificity (82% vs 81%, respectively). The average accuracy (83%) was the same for both.
The results of this study showed that there was no difference in accuracy of observer performance for detection of wrist fractures with a PC compared with that with a PACS workstation.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To investigate whether there is any difference in the presented image quality between a medical grade monitor and a "commercial off- the- shelf" (COTS) monitor when displaying an 8 bit dental image. Method: The DICOM part 14: GSDF was verified for both monitors. A visual grading characteristics (VGC) curve was constructed to measure the difference in image quality between the two monitors by comparing radiological structures displayed on each monitor with a DICOM part 14: GSDF calibrated laptop monitor as reference. Results: All of the monitors conformed to within the AAPM TG18 10% tolerance levels for the assessment of the DICOM part 14: GSDF. There was no difference in the preferred perceived visual sensation for the displayed image between the two tested monitors, AUCVGC = 0.53 95%CI [0.47, 0.69]. Conclusions: A DICOM part 14: GSDF COTS monitor is capable of displaying an image quality that is equally preferred to a DICOM part 14: GSDF medical grade monitor for an 8 bit image file.
    Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 11/2014; DOI:10.1259/dmfr.20140148 · 1.27 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The future of radiography will be digital. In exotic pet radiography, where some of the animals have a very low body weight and anatomic structures can be small, detail rendition plays an important feature in image quality. Veterinarians should be familiar with the technical principles, image quality criteria, and radiation exposure issues associated with the various types of digital systems currently available. This article discusses basic principles of digital radiography, technical solutions, and selected parameters characterizing detectors, processing, and monitors. An overview of reported experiences is given, and results from experimental clinical studies are reviewed to evaluate the current options and limitations in applying digital radiography to exotic pet medicine.
    Journal of Exotic Pet Medicine 01/2012; 21(1):71–79. DOI:10.1053/j.jepm.2011.11.006 · 0.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vertical root fracture (VRF) is a complication which is chiefly diagnosed radiographically. Recently, film-based radiography has been substituted with digital radiography. At the moment, there is a wide range of monitors available in the market for viewing digital images. The present study aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of medical and conventional monitors in detection of vertical root fractures. In this in vitro study 228 extracted single-rooted human teeth were endodontically treated. Vertical root fractures were induced in 114 samples. The teeth were imaged by a digital charge-coupled device radiography using parallel technique. The images were evaluated by a radiologist and an endodontist on two medical and conventional liquid-crystal display (LCD) monitors twice. Z-test was used to analyze the sensitivity, accuracy and specificity of each monitor. Significance level was set at 0.05. Inter and intra observer agreements were calculated by Cohen's kappa. Accuracy, specificity and sensitivity for conventional monitor were calculated as 67.5%, 72%, 62.5% respectively; and data for medical grade monitor were 67.5%, 66.5% and 68% respectively. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences in detecting VRF between the two techniques. Inter-observer agreement for conventional and medical monitor was 0.47 and 0.55 respectively (moderate). Intra-observer agreement was 0.78 for medical monitor and 0.87 for conventional one (substantial). The type of monitor does not influence diagnosis of vertical root fractures.
    01/2013; 8(1):14-7.