Literature DB >> 15085446

Design requirements for radiology workstations.

Adrian Moise1, M Stella Atkins.   

Abstract

This article stresses the importance of capturing feedback from representative users in the early stages of product development. We present our solution to producing quality requirement specifications for radiology workstations, specifications that remain valid over time because we successfully anticipated the industry trends and the user's needs. We present the results from a user study performed in December 1999 in a radiology clinic equipped with state-of-the-art Picture Archiving and Communications Systems (PACS) and imaging scanners. The study involved eight radiologists who answered questions and provided comments on three complementary research topics. First, we asked our subjects to enumerate the advantages and the disadvantages for both softcopy and hardcopy reading. We identified the two major factors for productivity improvement through the use of PACS workstations: workflow re-engineering and process automation. Second, we collected radiologist feedback on the use of hanging protocols (HPs). The results indicated the high importance of automatic image organization through HPs, with the potential effect of reducing the interpretation time by 10-20%. Our subjects estimated that 10-15 HPs would cover about 85%-95% of the regular radiological examinations. Third, we investigated the impact of the display devices on the radiologist's workflow. Our results indicated that the number and the properties of the monitors is a modality-specific requirement. The main results from this study on key functional requirements for softcopy interpretation only recently were incorporated in most of the current, successful PACS workstations.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15085446      PMCID: PMC3043976          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-004-1003-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  2 in total

1.  Work flow redesign: the key to success when using PACS.

Authors:  Eliot Siegel; Bruce Reiner
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Radiology workstation design for the medical intensive care unit.

Authors:  Adrian Moise; Stella M Atkins
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2002-03-19       Impact factor: 4.056

  2 in total
  5 in total

1.  Evaluating different radiology workstation interaction techniques with radiologists and laypersons.

Authors:  A Moise; M S Atkins; R Rohling
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Designing better radiology workstations: impact of two user interfaces on interpretation errors and user satisfaction.

Authors:  Adrian Moise; M Stella Atkins
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  User questionnaire to evaluate the radiological workspace.

Authors:  Peter M A van Ooijen; Allya P Koesoema; Matthijs Oudkerk
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  General consumer communication tools for improved image management and communication in medicine.

Authors:  Chantal Rosset; Antoine Rosset; Osman Ratib
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Medical imaging informatics: how it improves radiology practice today.

Authors:  J Raymond Geis
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 4.056

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.