PURPOSE: Evaluation of time efficiency in softcopy reading versus hardcopy reading of digital chest x-rays. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 130 normal and pathologic chest x-rays in two plains were analyzed by 4 experienced radiologist at both a digital workstation and the light box. Reading time and switch time between two patient folders were measured as well as the frequency of post-processing at the monitor. RESULTS: Reading time at the workstation slightly exceeded reading time at the light box; differences were not statistically significant. Post-processing (frequency between 2% and 83%) did not significantly prolong reading time. Mean switch time between two patient folders was 4.3 sec at the workstation and 13.7 sec at the light box. CONCLUSION: As compared to hardcopy reading, softcopy reading of digital chest x-rays does not significantly increase reading time. Switch time between patient folders can be reduced at the workstation by a factor of two to four.
PURPOSE: Evaluation of time efficiency in softcopy reading versus hardcopy reading of digital chest x-rays. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 130 normal and pathologic chest x-rays in two plains were analyzed by 4 experienced radiologist at both a digital workstation and the light box. Reading time and switch time between two patient folders were measured as well as the frequency of post-processing at the monitor. RESULTS: Reading time at the workstation slightly exceeded reading time at the light box; differences were not statistically significant. Post-processing (frequency between 2% and 83%) did not significantly prolong reading time. Mean switch time between two patient folders was 4.3 sec at the workstation and 13.7 sec at the light box. CONCLUSION: As compared to hardcopy reading, softcopy reading of digital chest x-rays does not significantly increase reading time. Switch time between patient folders can be reduced at the workstation by a factor of two to four.