Assessment of monitor conditions for the display of radiological diagnostic images and ambient lighting

Diagnostic Accuracy and Visual Search Efficiency: Single 8 MP vs. Dual 5 MP Displays

This study compared a single 8 MP vs. dual 5 MP displays for diagnostic accuracy, reading time, number of times the readers zoomed/panned images, and visual search. Six radiologists viewed 60 mammographic cases, once on each display. A sub-set of 15 cases was viewed in a secondary study using eye-tracking. For viewing time, there was significant difference (F = 13.901, p = 0.0002), with 8 MP taking less time (62.04 vs. 68.99 s). There was no significant difference (F = 0.254, p = 0.6145) in zoom/pan use (1.94 vs. 1.89). Total number of fixations was significantly (F = 4.073, p = 0.0466) lower with 8 MP (134.47 vs. 154.29). Number of times readers scanned between images was significantly fewer (F = 10.305, p = 0.0018) with 8 MP (6.83 vs. 8.22). Time to first fixate lesion did not differ (F = 0.126, p = 0.7240). It did not take any longer to detect the lesion as a function of the display configuration. Total time spent on lesion did not differ (F = 0.097, p = 0.7567) (8.59 vs. 8.39). Overall, the single 8 MP display yielded the same diagnostic accuracy as the dual 5 MP displays. The lower resolution did not appear to influence the readers' ability to detect and view the lesion details, as the eye-position study showed no differences in time to first fixate or total time on the lesions. Nor did the lower resolution result in significant differences in the amount of zooming and panning that the readers did while viewing the cases.

Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare imaging properties of 20 intraoral digital systems objectively.

STUDY DESIGN

Using a direct current x-ray source and a radiographic phantom, a series of radiographs was made from the lowest exposure time until the sensor saturated. Images were captured and stored. Incident exposures were measured using a radiation meter. Gray scale, spatial resolution, and contrast/detail detectability were evaluated. Presence of 7 distinct steps spanning the gray levels from 0 to 255 was used to define the exposure latitude. An "optimal" exposure, the lowest exposure where maximum spatial resolution and contrast/detail detectability were achieved, was determined.

RESULTS

The systems varied greatly in latitude, "optimal" exposure, and image quality. This may not be readily apparent to the naked eye or when clinical images are compared.

CONCLUSIONS

Objective assessment of image quality with a quality assurance tool makes it possible to evaluate and compare the various intraoral digital systems.

Performance evaluation of soft copy display systems according to AAPM TG18 protocol

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the display performance of the liquid crystal display monitors according to the American association of physicists in medicine task group 18 (AAPM TG18) protocol at prior and after new calibration. We measured minimum and maximum luminance, luminance ratio, luminance and contrast response, luminance angular and spatial dependency, resolution, veiling glare and chromaticity quantitatively for 33 medical displays. Display noise was evaluated only visually. The mean maximum luminance and luminance ratio were 386 and 273 cd m(-2), respectively. The mean deviation of measured luminance and contrast response from expected response associated with the digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) grayscale standard display function (GSDF) were 9.76 and 2.35 % at prior calibration and 1.23 and 0.26 % after recalibration, respectively. In luminance uniformity test the mean maximum luminance deviation was 16 %. Luminance method was used in the spatial resolution test and the mean percent luminance difference was 12 % at the center. The mean glare ratio was 1 154. The average color uniformity parameter across the display area of each display device was 0.0093. Majority of the test results were in good agreement with the criteria recommended by AAPM TG18 report. Considerable improvement was observed in display luminance and contrast response with respect to expected response of DICOM GSDF after new calibration for some displays.

Reliability of a radiological grading system for dermal backflow in lymphoscintigraphy imaging

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Lymphoscintigraphy may be used for diagnosing secondary lymphedema. Dermal backflow, the presence of radiotracer in dermal lymphatics, is a key clinical feature. Although often reported as present or absent, a scale that assesses the severity of dermal backflow has been previously developed. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of these two methods of assessment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen experienced nuclear medicine physicians assessed the quantity of dermal backflow of 57 lymphoscintigraphy scans using a 4-point descriptive scale that was dichotomized for secondary analysis. Each scan included images from four time points for women previously diagnosed with secondary lymphedema (n = 47) and controls (n = 5); five scans were presented twice to examine intraobserver reliability. This was further investigated as 13 physicians viewed the scans again on an Apple iPad2. The physicians rated their confidence in their scoring. Readers were blinded to clinical history.

RESULTS

Although both the 2- and 4-point scale had moderate interobserver reliability, the reliability of the 2-point scale was slightly higher (4-point: Fleiss κ = .418, standard error [SE] = .008); 2-point: Fleiss κ = .574, SE = .013). Low interobserver reliability was found when only control subjects were considered (Fleiss κ = 0.055, SE = 0.034). Intraobserver reliability of the five repeated images varied from poor to perfect (Cohen κ = .063 to 1.00), whereas moderate to substantial intraobserver reliability (Cohen's κ = .342 to .752) was found when comparing devices. The readers were highly confident of their scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, moderate intraobserver and interobserver reliability was found for quantifying dermal backflow with both the 2- and 4-point scale.

Comparison of the commercial color LCD and the medical monochrome LCD using randomized object test patterns

Workstations and electronic display devices in a picture archiving and communication system (PACS) provide a convenient and efficient platform for medical diagnosis. The performance of display devices has to be verified to ensure that image quality is not degraded. In this study, we designed a set of randomized object test patterns (ROTPs) consisting of randomly located spheres with various image characteristics to evaluate the performance of a 2.5 mega-pixel (MP) commercial color LCD and a 3 MP diagnostic monochrome LCD in several aspects, including the contrast, resolution, point spread effect, and noise. The ROTPs were then merged into 120 abdominal CT images. Five radiologists were invited to review the CT images, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was carried out using a five-point rating scale. In the high background patterns of ROTPs, the sensitivity performance was comparable between both monitors in terms of contrast and resolution, whereas, in the low background patterns, the performance of the commercial color LCD was significantly poorer than that of the diagnostic monochrome LCD in all aspects. The average area under the ROC curve (AUC) for reviewing abdominal CT images was 0.717±0.0200 and 0.740±0.0195 for the color monitor and the diagnostic monitor, respectively. The observation time (OT) was 145±27.6 min and 127±19.3 min, respectively. No significant differences appeared in AUC (p = 0.265) and OT (p = 0.07). The overall results indicate that ROTPs can be implemented as a quality control tool to evaluate the intrinsic characteristics of display devices. Although there is still a gap in technology between different types of LCDs, commercial color LCDs could replace diagnostic monochrome LCDs as a platform for reviewing abdominal CT images after monitor calibration.

Influence of display quality on radiologists' performance in the detection of lung nodules on radiographs

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of display quality on radiologists' performance in the detection of lung nodules. Display systems with various technical properties were considered based on their general availability in a radiology department. Their quality was assessed by physical tests. Multireader-multicase receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate observer performance. The area under the curve (Az) was used as a metric for detectability of simulated lung nodules with diameters of 5 mm and 10 mm, and peak contrast values ranging from 0.1 (subtle) to 0.4 (evident) that were digitally superimposed on normal chest radiographs. Three experienced radiologists interpreted a batch of 60 radiographs on five different display systems; four monitors (two liquid crystal display (LCD) and two cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors) and one printed hardcopy. The physical tests showed superior performance of the two LCD monitors. ROC analysis resulted in the following Az scores: LCD-5MP Az = 0.78, hardcopy Az = 0.77, LCDc-2MP Az = 0.75, CRT-5MP Az = 0.72 and CRTc-1MP Az = 0.71. Difference in Az scores between the LCD-5MP monitor and both the CRT-5MP (p = 0.04) and CRTc-1MP (p = 0.01) monitors was significant. The primary class CRT-5MP monitor that showed reduced observer performance failed to comply with physical acceptance requirements. Luminance response was particularly observed to be insufficient. The results indicate that a quality assurance program has the potential to detect non-optimised display systems that could otherwise result in reduced observer performance.

Preliminary validation of a new variable pattern for daily quality assurance of medical image display devices

This paper reports on a comparative study between the well-established test patterns for daily quality assurance (QA) of monitors of the American Association of Medical Physicists, Task Group 18 (AAPMtg18) and the Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V (DIN), and a newly proposed variable test pattern. A characteristic of the test patterns currently used for the QA of monitors is their static nature: The same test pattern is always used. This enables a learning effect that may bias the results over time. To address this problem we have developed a variable pattern for the quality assurance of monitors (MoniQA) that allows an evaluation of contrast visibility, geometric distortion, resolution, global image quality including uniformity, and artifacts. The test pattern includes randomly generated elements intended to prevent the observer from learning the test. Examples are random characters that have to be discriminated from the background to evaluate the threshold luminance difference and variable positions of different features in the test pattern. The newly proposed test patterns were generated and visualized on different viewing stations with a software tool developed in JAVA. In this study, we validated these patterns against the well-known AAPMtg18 and DIN test patterns on 22 monitors. The results showed that the MoniQA test can indicate the same monitor problems as the other well-known patterns and is significantly quicker to evaluate than the AAPMtg18 test patterns. The MoniQA pattern is a promising alternative for daily quality control of medical viewing stations.

Practical assessment of the display performance of radiology workstations

The performance of 14 primary clinical display monitor workstations in use in the Radiology Department of a large acute NHS Trust was assessed using the methods and guidelines described by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18. Tests undertaken included the measurement of ambient light, display uniformity, luminance ratio, luminance response, maximum luminance and spatial resolution. Four display monitors failed to meet at least one of the test's guideline tolerances. In addition a number of display monitors were found to be operating at settings that might reduce their useful life span. These devices were either replaced or recalibrated by the installers, or were subject to local adjustment to ensure applicable standards were met. Consequently the study suggests that quality assurance testing of display monitors used for image reporting is necessary and valuable to ensure that images are viewed at an appropriate standard.

Ambient Lighting: Effect of Illumination on Soft-Copy Viewing of Radiographs of the Wrist

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the work was to establish optimum ambient light conditions for viewing radiologic images of the wrist on liquid crystal display monitors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five ambient light levels were investigated: 480, 100, 40, 25, and 7 lux. Seventy-nine experienced radiologists were asked to examine 30 posteroanterior wrist images and decide whether a fracture was present. All images were displayed on liquid crystal display monitors. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed, and the numbers of false-positive and false-negative findings were recorded.

RESULTS

For all the radiologists, greater area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and lower numbers of false-positive and false-negative findings were recorded at 40 and 25 lux compared with 480 and 100 lux. At 7 lux, the results were generally similar to those at 480 and 100 lux. The experience and knowledge of radiologists specializing in imaging of musculoskeletal trauma appeared to compensate in part for inappropriate lighting levels.

CONCLUSION

Typical office lighting and current recommendations on ambient lighting can reduce diagnostic efficacy compared with lower levels of ambient lighting. If, however, no light other than that of the monitor is used, results are similar to those with excessive levels of lighting. Careful control of ambient lighting is therefore required to ensure that diagnostic accuracy is maximized, particularly for clinicians not expert in interpreting posteroanterior wrist images.

An indicator device for monitoring of room illuminance level in the radiological image viewing environment

Illuminance level in the softcopy image viewing room is a very important factor to optimize productivity in radiological diagnosis. In today's radiological environment, the illuminance measurements are normally done during the quality control procedure and performed annually. Although the room is equipped with dimmer switches, radiologists are not able to decide the level of illuminance according to the standards. The aim of this study is to develop a simple real-time illuminance detector system to assist the radiologists in deciding an adequate illuminance level during radiological image viewing. The system indicates illuminance in a very simple visual form by using light emitting diodes. By employing the device in the viewing room, illuminance level can be monitored and adjusted effectively.