Literature DB >> 28455638

Radiologist Digital Workspace Use and Preference: a Survey-Based Study.

Arjun Sharma1, Kenneth Wang2, Eliot Siegel2.   

Abstract

Literature regarding the heterogeneity of and preferences for radiology workstation design-and, in particular, the digital workspace of the radiology workstation-is scant. The purpose of this study was to determine the nature of the digital environments across the specialty and the degree of satisfaction users associated with the particular facets of those environments. A survey was sent to the membership of the Association of University Radiologists in February 2015. The survey comprised 10 questions establishing demographics, current typical workstation setup, perceived satisfaction with that setup, and preferences for potential altered setups. A total of 336 radiologists responded, with a cross-section similar to that described in the 2015 ACR annual workforce survey (1). Although there was a rough split in the number of radiologists using one or two non-diagnostic monitors (46 vs. 51%, respectively), the strong majority (75%) of radiologists use two diagnostic monitors. Users of two non-diagnostic monitors were more likely to keep open the case info (87 vs. 68%) and EMR (84 vs 68%). More senior radiologists tended to find the current setup easy more frequent than younger radiologists, and the latter group was more likely to believe additional monitors would be helpful. Although many radiologists are comfortable with their computing workflows, a significant number indicate dissatisfaction and may be interested in being able to specify the amount of monitor space with which they can work. Additional monitors may promote improved quality in addition to any potential productivity gains.

Keywords:  Diagnostic display monitors; Ergonomics; Productivity; Workflow

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28455638      PMCID: PMC5681469          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-017-9971-8

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


  9 in total

1.  PACS monitors: an evolution of radiologist's viewing techniques.

Authors:  W F Bennett; K K Vaswani; J A Mendiola; D G Spigos
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2002-03-21       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  The effects of ambient lighting in chest radiology reading rooms.

Authors:  Benjamin J Pollard; Ehsan Samei; Amarpreet S Chawla; Craig Beam; Laura E Heyneman; Lynne M Hurwitz Koweek; Santiago Martinez-Jimenez; Lacey Washington; Noriyuki Hashimoto; H Page McAdams
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  The 2015 ACR Commission on Human Resources Workforce Survey.

Authors:  Edward I Bluth; Jan Cox; Swati Bansal; Daniel Green
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 5.532

4.  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

5.  Modulation of competing memory systems by distraction.

Authors:  Karin Foerde; Barbara J Knowlton; Russell A Poldrack
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-07-25       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Technology and informal education: what is taught, what is learned.

Authors:  Patricia M Greenfield
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-01-02       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Effect of ambient sound masking on the accuracy of computerized speech recognition.

Authors:  Jonah Zwemer; Abigail Lenhart; Woojin Kim; Khan M Siddiqui; Eliot L Siegel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Do telephone call interruptions have an impact on radiology resident diagnostic accuracy?

Authors:  Brad J Balint; Scott D Steenburg; Hongbu Lin; Changyu Shen; Jennifer L Steele; Richard B Gunderman
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 9.  Combating the Health Risks of Sedentary Behavior in the Contemporary Radiology Reading Room.

Authors:  Jason C Hoffmann; Sameer Mittal; Caroline H Hoffmann; Ahmed Fadl; Amanjit Baadh; Douglas S Katz; Jonathan Flug
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 3.959

  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  Survey Results Regarding Uptake and Impact of Synthetic Digital Mammography With Tomosynthesis in the Screening Setting.

Authors:  Samantha P Zuckerman; Brian L Sprague; Donald L Weaver; Sally D Herschorn; Emily F Conant
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 2.  A review of existing and potential computer user interfaces for modern radiology.

Authors:  Antoine Iannessi; Pierre-Yves Marcy; Olivier Clatz; Anne-Sophie Bertrand; Maki Sugimoto
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2018-05-16
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.