| Literature DB >> 35328202 |
Samir Benbelkacem1, Adel Oulefki1, Sos Agaian2, Nadia Zenati-Henda1, Thaweesak Trongtirakul3, Djamel Aouam1, Mostefa Masmoudi1, Mohamed Zemmouri4.
Abstract
Recently many studies have shown the effectiveness of using augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) in biomedical image analysis. However, they are not automating the COVID level classification process. Additionally, even with the high potential of CT scan imagery to contribute to research and clinical use of COVID-19 (including two common tasks in lung image analysis: segmentation and classification of infection regions), publicly available data-sets are still a missing part in the system care for Algerian patients. This article proposes designing an automatic VR and AR platform for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic data analysis, classification, and visualization to address the above-mentioned challenges including (1) utilizing a novel automatic CT image segmentation and localization system to deliver critical information about the shapes and volumes of infected lungs, (2) elaborating volume measurements and lung voxel-based classification procedure, and (3) developing an AR and VR user-friendly three-dimensional interface. It also centered on developing patient questionings and medical staff qualitative feedback, which led to advances in scalability and higher levels of engagement/evaluations. The extensive computer simulations on CT image classification show a better efficiency against the state-of-the-art methods using a COVID-19 dataset of 500 Algerian patients. The developed system has been used by medical professionals for better and faster diagnosis of the disease and providing an effective treatment plan more accurately by using real-time data and patient information.Entities:
Keywords: 3D COVID-19 visualization; augmented reality (AR); double logarithmic entropy-based segmentation; virtual reality (VR); voxel-based classification
Year: 2022 PMID: 35328202 PMCID: PMC8947514 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12030649
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) ISSN: 2075-4418
Figure 1The proposed framework of lesion segmentation, classification and virtual/augmented reality rendering and diagnosis of COVID-19.
Figure 2Proposed approach for severity classification.
Figure 3COVID-SVAR data statistics.
Quantitative evaluation of severity classification. Bold font indicates best result obtained for each experiment.
| Classification of Severity | Accuracy | Precision | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ratio of pixels [ | 0.973 ± 0.02 |
|
| 0.974 ± 0.02 |
| Proposed |
| 0.796 ± 0.07 | 0.815 ± 0.06 |
|
Figure 4Virtual reality viewer with different stages of disease severity, (a) mild, (b) moderate and (c) critical infection.
Figure 5Augmented reality viewer with different stages of disease severity with different patients, (a) mild, (b) moderate and (c) critical infection.
Patient questionnaire (PQ).
| Topic | Question |
|---|---|
| SPQ1: Understanding of disease | How do you rate your comprehension of your COVID/disease? (1: Not at all–7: Very well) |
| SPQ2: Disease awareness | I understand how big my volume COVID-lesion is? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ3: Disease location | I can understand my COVID lesion location (1: Not at all–7: Very well) |
| SPQ4: Treatment plan awareness | I can understand the reasons my doctor provided the treatment plan? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ5: Satisfaction | I’m feeling good with the treatment plan? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ6: 3D model analysis | The 3D model helps me to learn about COVID-19 infection? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ7: COVID gravity awareness | The 3D model helps me understand the complication from the COVID propagation? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
Medical staff questionnaire (MSQ).
| Topic | Question |
|---|---|
| SPQ1: Comfort | Was the VR & AR pleasant? (1: Not at all–7: Very well) |
| SPQ2: Usefulness (severity classification) | Is the evaluation of complex cases better with VR & AR compared to standard display? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ3: Fastness (severity classification) | Is the evaluation of complex cases faster? (1: Not at all–7: Very well) |
| SPQ4: Training efficiency (1) | How did you rate the ability for student training? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ5: Training efficiency (2) | How did you rate the ability for resident training? (1: Not at all–7: Very much) |
| SPQ6: Practical use | How did you rate the ability for clinical use? (1: Very low–7: Very high) |
Survey responses for understanding of COVID-19 disease using CT scan imagery against VR models.
| CT Images | VR Models | |
|---|---|---|
| Comprehension of disease | 4.670 ± 0.678 | 6.250 ± 0.494 |
| Lesion size | 3.231 ± 0.762 | 6.193 ± 0.672 |
| Lesion location | 3.769 ± 0.525 | 6.613 ± 0.239 |
| Comfort Level | 4.931 ± 0.438 | 6.108 + 0.219 |
| Awareness of the disease gravity | 4.296 ± 0.397 | 6.201 ± 0.264 |
Figure 6Responses to the PQ questionnaire using the three display methods (the error bars indicate the standard).
Responses with median answers on the 7-Likert scale.
| Questions | Experts | Resident | Medical | Nurses |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5.56 | 6.13 | 6.43 | 6.36 |
|
| 5.18 | 6.49 | 6.58 | 6.28 |
|
| 5.10 | 6.02 | 6.24 | 6.10 |
|
| 6.29 | 6.57 | 6.71 | 6.51 |
|
| 6.12 | 6.21 | 6.32 | 6.32 |
|
| 6.39 | 6.50 | 6.61 | 6.23 |