Esa Liukkonen1,2, Airi Jartti3,4, Marianne Haapea3,4, Heljä Oikarinen3,4, Lauri Ahvenjärvi3,4, Seija Mattila3,4, Terhi Nevala3,4, Kari Palosaari3,4, Marja Perhomaa3,4, Miika T Nieminen3,4,5. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, P.O. BOX 50, Fin-90029 OYS, Oulu, Finland. esa.liukkonen@ppshp.fi. 2. Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland. esa.liukkonen@ppshp.fi. 3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, P.O. BOX 50, Fin-90029 OYS, Oulu, Finland. 4. Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland. 5. Medical Imaging, Physics and Technology consortium, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare diagnostic accuracy in the detection of subtle chest lesions on digital chest radiographs using medical-grade displays, consumer-grade displays, and tablet devices under bright and dim ambient light. METHODS: Five experienced radiologists independently assessed 50 chest radiographs (32 with subtle pulmonary findings and 18 without apparent findings) under bright (510 lx) and dim (16 lx) ambient lighting. Computed tomography was used as the reference standard for interstitial and nodular lesions and follow-up chest radiograph for pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity were calculated for assessments carried out in all displays and compared using the McNemar test. The level of significance was set to p < 0.05. RESULTS: Significant differences in sensitivity between the assessments under bright and dim lighting were found among consumer-grade displays in interstitial opacities with, and in pneumothorax without, Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine-Grayscale Standard Display Function (DICOM-GSDF) calibration. Compared to 6 megapixel (MP) display under bright lighting, sensitivity in pneumothorax was lower in the tablet device and the consumer-grade display. Sensitivity in interstitial opacities was lower in the DICOM-GSDF calibrated consumer-grade display. CONCLUSIONS: A consumer-grade display with or without DICOM-GSDF calibration or a tablet device is not suitable for reading digital chest radiographs in bright lighting. No significant differences were observed between five displays in dim light. KEY POINTS: • Ambient lighting affects performance of consumer-grade displays (with or without DICOM-GSDF calibration). • Bright light decreases detection of pneumothorax on non-medical displays. • Bright light decreases detection of interstitial opacities on DICOM-GSDF-calibrated, consumer-grade displays. • Dim light is sufficient to detect subtle chest lesions from all displays.
OBJECTIVES: To compare diagnostic accuracy in the detection of subtle chest lesions on digital chest radiographs using medical-grade displays, consumer-grade displays, and tablet devices under bright and dim ambient light. METHODS: Five experienced radiologists independently assessed 50 chest radiographs (32 with subtle pulmonary findings and 18 without apparent findings) under bright (510 lx) and dim (16 lx) ambient lighting. Computed tomography was used as the reference standard for interstitial and nodular lesions and follow-up chest radiograph for pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity were calculated for assessments carried out in all displays and compared using the McNemar test. The level of significance was set to p < 0.05. RESULTS: Significant differences in sensitivity between the assessments under bright and dim lighting were found among consumer-grade displays in interstitial opacities with, and in pneumothorax without, Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine-Grayscale Standard Display Function (DICOM-GSDF) calibration. Compared to 6 megapixel (MP) display under bright lighting, sensitivity in pneumothorax was lower in the tablet device and the consumer-grade display. Sensitivity in interstitial opacities was lower in the DICOM-GSDF calibrated consumer-grade display. CONCLUSIONS: A consumer-grade display with or without DICOM-GSDF calibration or a tablet device is not suitable for reading digital chest radiographs in bright lighting. No significant differences were observed between five displays in dim light. KEY POINTS: • Ambient lighting affects performance of consumer-grade displays (with or without DICOM-GSDF calibration). • Bright light decreases detection of pneumothorax on non-medical displays. • Bright light decreases detection of interstitial opacities on DICOM-GSDF-calibrated, consumer-grade displays. • Dim light is sufficient to detect subtle chest lesions from all displays.
Entities:
Keywords:
Calibration; Chest radiography; Data display; Digital radiography; Illumination
Authors: Ehsan Samei; Aldo Badano; Dev Chakraborty; Ken Compton; Craig Cornelius; Kevin Corrigan; Michael J Flynn; Bradley Hemminger; Nick Hangiandreou; Jeffrey Johnson; Donna M Moxley-Stevens; William Pavlicek; Hans Roehrig; Lois Rutz; Jeffrey Shepard; Robert A Uzenoff; Jihong Wang; Charles E Willis Journal: Med Phys Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Antonio J Salazar; Diego A Aguirre; Juliana Ocampo; Juan C Camacho; Xavier A Díaz Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Daniel Pinto Dos Santos; Jonas Welter; Tilman Emrich; Florian Jungmann; Evelyn Dappa; Peter Mildenberger; Roman Kloeckner Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-06-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Guy S Handelman; Ailin C Rogers; Zafir Babiker; Michael J Lee; Morgan P McMonagle Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2018-04-28 Impact factor: 3.397
Authors: Ryan T Hoff; Andrew Mazulis; Meghana Doniparthi; Assad Munis; Anne Rivelli; Asif Lakha; Eli Ehrenpreis Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2021-05-27