Literature DB >> 23319112

Breast screen new South wales generally demonstrates good radiologic viewing conditions.

BaoLin Pauline Soh1, Warwick Lee, Jennifer L Diffey, Mark F McEntee, Peter L Kench, Warren M Reed, Patrick C Brennan.   

Abstract

This study measured reading workstation monitors and the viewing environment currently available within BreastScreen New South Wales (BSNSW) centres to determine levels of adherence to national and international guidelines. Thirteen workstations from four BSNSW service centres were assessed using the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18 Quality Control test pattern. Reading workstation monitor performance and ambient light levels when interpreting screening mammographic images were assessed using spectroradiometer CS-2000 and chroma meter CL-200. Overall, radiologic monitors within BSNSW were operating at good acceptable levels. Some non-adherence to published guidelines included the percentage difference in maximum luminance between pairs of primary monitors at individual workstations (61.5 % or 30.8 % of workstations depending on specific guidelines), maximum luminance (23.1 % of workstations), luminance non-uniformity (11.5 % of workstations) and minimum luminance (3.8 % of workstations). A number of ambient light measurements did not comply with the only available evidence-based guideline relevant to the methodology used in this study. Larger ambient light variations across sites are shown when monitors were switched off, suggesting that differences in ambient lighting between sites can be masked when a standard mammogram is displayed for photometric measurements. Overall, BSNSW demonstrated good adherence to available guidelines, although some non-compliance has been shown. Recently updated United Kingdom and Australian guidelines should help reduce confusion generated by the plethora and sometimes dated nature of currently available recommendations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23319112      PMCID: PMC3705022          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-013-9571-1

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


  14 in total

1.  Influence of film and monitor display luminance on observer performance and visual search.

Authors:  E Krupinski; H Roehrig; T Furukawa
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  Effects of luminance and resolution on observer performance with chest radiographs.

Authors:  J M Herron; T M Bender; W L Campbell; J H Sumkin; H E Rockette; D Gur
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Impact of ambient light and window settings on the detectability of catheters on soft-copy display of chest radiographs at bedside.

Authors:  Michael H Fuchsjäger; Cornelia M Schaefer-Prokop; Edith Eisenhuber; Peter Homolka; Michael Weber; Martin A Funovics; Mathias Prokop
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Assessment of flat panel LCD primary class display performance based on AAPM TG 18 acceptance protocol.

Authors:  Haijo Jung; Hee-Joung Kim; Won-Suk Kang; Sun Kook Yoo; Kiyoto Fujioka; Mikio Hasegawa; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Effect of monitor luminance and ambient light on observer performance in soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs.

Authors:  Jin Mo Goo; Ja-Young Choi; Jung-Gi Im; Hyun Ju Lee; Myung Jin Chung; Daehee Han; Seong Ho Park; Jong Hyo Kim; Sang-Hee Nam
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-07-23       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Filmless in 60 days: the impact of picture archiving and communications systems within a large urban hospital.

Authors:  D B Hayt; S Alexander; J Drakakis; N Berdebes
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Effects of monitor luminance change on observer detection performance.

Authors:  Satoshi Hidano; Mitsuru Ikeda; Takeo Ishigaki; Hisashi Usami; Kazuhiro Shimamoto; Katsuhiko Kato
Journal:  Comput Med Imaging Graph       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 4.790

8.  Soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs: effect of ambient light and automatic optimization of monitor luminance.

Authors:  Martin Uffmann; Mathias Prokop; Walter Kupper; Thomas Mang; Volker Fiedler; Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 6.016

9.  Ambient illumination revisited: a new adaptation-based approach for optimizing medical imaging reading environments.

Authors:  Amarpreet S Chawla; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 10.  Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls.

Authors:  Aneesa S Majid; Ellen Shaw de Paredes; Richard D Doherty; Neil R Sharma; Xavier Salvador
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.333

View more
  1 in total

1.  Number of mammography cases read per year is a strong predictor of sensitivity.

Authors:  Wasfi I Suleiman; Sarah J Lewis; Dianne Georgian-Smith; Michael G Evanoff; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-05-07
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.