Literature DB >> 29869010

Of Mice and Roentgen: Radiologist Satisfaction with a Non-conventional 13-Button Mouse-One Institution's Experience.

Kevin Denton1, Irfanullah Haider2, Jacqueline Hill3, Suzanne L Hunt4, Ryan Ash3.   

Abstract

Increasing radiologic exam volume and complexity necessitates leveraging advanced hardware solutions to optimize workflow efficiency. We evaluated radiologist satisfaction of a programmable 13-button non-conventional mouse compared to a conventional three-button mouse in daily interpretation workflow following a brief 2-day trial period. A prospective study was conducted with radiology staff and residents in a tertiary care center from 2015 to 2016. A survey was distributed prior to and after a tutorial and a 2-day non-conventional mouse trial period. The post-survey evaluated usage time, device settings, satisfaction, preferences, and perceived efficiency of both mice. Descriptive analyses, correlations, the Sign test, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to evaluate responses. Fifty-nine participants completed pre- and post-surveys. Several (41%, n = 24) had prior experience with a non-conventional mouse. Prior to the trial, one third of all participants (35.6%, n = 21) reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their conventional mouse. After spending an average of 9.8 h using the non-conventional mouse, there were no statistically significant changes in overall satisfaction with either conventional or non-conventional mice (p = 0.84 and p = 0.39, respectively). However, 76.3% (n = 45) agreed/somewhat agreed they preferred to use the non-conventional mouse in their daily workflow as opposed to the conventional mouse. The non-conventional mouse was also perceived as more efficient (66.1%, n = 39), required less time (62.7%, n = 37) and effort (74.6%, n = 44) to view images, allowed for easier manipulation of windows/images (76.3%, n = 45), and was more comfortable to use (78.0%, n = 46). Although there were no statistically significant shifts in overall satisfaction, participants reported a higher level of satisfaction, perceived efficiency, and preference for a non-conventional 13-button mouse compared to a conventional three-button mouse following a brief, 2-day trial period.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gaming-mouse; Interpretation efficiency; Mouse; Picture archiving and communications system; User interface device

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29869010      PMCID: PMC6261182          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-018-0094-7

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


  8 in total

1.  Alternative input devices for efficient navigation of large CT angiography data sets.

Authors:  Anthony J Sherbondy; Djamila Holmlund; Geoffrey D Rubin; Pamela K Schraedley; Terry Winograd; Sandy Napel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Electronic imaging workstations: ergonomic issues and the user interface.

Authors:  S C Horii
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.333

3.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

Authors:  Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.317

4.  Alternative user interface devices for improved navigation of CT datasets.

Authors:  M Lidén; T Andersson; H Geijer
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 5.  CT angiography after 20 years: a transformation in cardiovascular disease characterization continues to advance.

Authors:  Geoffrey D Rubin; Jonathon Leipsic; U Joseph Schoepf; Dominik Fleischmann; Sandy Napel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Real view radiology-impact on search patterns and confidence in radiology education.

Authors:  Jared H Bailey; Trenton D Roth; Mark D Kohli; Darel E Heitkamp
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 3.173

7.  Evaluating interaction techniques for stack mode viewing.

Authors:  M Stella Atkins; Jennifer Fernquist; Arthur E Kirkpatrick; Bruce B Forster
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-07-23       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Radiologist assessment of PACS user interface devices.

Authors:  David L Weiss; Khan M Siddiqui; Joe Scopelliti
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 5.532

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Optimizing the radiologist work environment: Actionable tips to improve workplace satisfaction, efficiency, and minimize burnout.

Authors:  Minu Agarwal; Christian B van der Pol; Michael N Patlas; Amar Udare; Andrew D Chung; Julian Rubino
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 3.469

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.