Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology

Francina EM Dams,2 KY Esther Leung,1 Pieter HM van der Valk,2 Marc CJM Kock,2 Jeroen Bosman,1 Sjoerd P Niehof1 1Medical Physics and Technology, 2Department of Radiology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands Background: To inform cost-effective decisions in purchasing new medical...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Dams FE, Leung KY, van der Valk PH, Kock MC, Bosman J, Niehof SP
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2014
Materias:	Medical technology R855-855.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c2021-12-02T03:47:50ZTechnical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology1179-1470https://doaj.org/article/b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c2014-10-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.dovepress.com/technical-and-radiological-image-quality-comparison-of-different-liqui-peer-reviewed-article-MDERhttps://doaj.org/toc/1179-1470 Francina EM Dams,2 KY Esther Leung,1 Pieter HM van der Valk,2 Marc CJM Kock,2 Jeroen Bosman,1 Sjoerd P Niehof1 1Medical Physics and Technology, 2Department of Radiology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands Background: To inform cost-effective decisions in purchasing new medical liquid crystal displays, we compared the image quality in displays made by three manufacturers. Methods: We recruited 19 radiologists and residents to compare the image quality of four liquid crystal displays, including 3-megapixel Barco®, Eizo®, and NEC® displays and a 6-megapixel Barco display. The evaluators were blinded to the manufacturers' names. Technical assessments were based on acceptance criteria and test patterns proposed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Radiological assessments were performed on images from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18. They included X-ray images of the thorax, knee, and breast, a computed tomographic image of the thorax, and a magnetic resonance image of the brain. Image quality was scored on an analog scale (range 0–10). Statistical analysis was performed with repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results: The Barco 3-megapixel display passed all acceptance criteria. The Eizo and NEC displays passed the acceptance criteria, except for the darkest pixel value in the grayscale display function. The Barco 6-megapixel display failed criteria for the maximum luminance response and the veiling glare. Mean radiological assessment scores were 7.8±1.1 (Barco 3-megapixel), 7.8±1.2 (Eizo), 8.1±1.0 (NEC), and 8.1±1.0 (Barco 6-megapixel). No significant differences were found between displays. Conclusion: According to the tested criteria, all the displays had comparable image quality; however, there was a three-fold difference in price between the most and least expensive displays. Keywords: data display, humans, radiographic image enhancement, user-computer interface, liquid crystalsDams FELeung KYvan der Valk PHKock MCBosman JNiehof SPDove Medical PressarticleMedical technologyR855-855.5ENMedical Devices: Evidence and Research, Vol 2014, Iss default, Pp 371-377 (2014)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medical technology R855-855.5
spellingShingle	Medical technology R855-855.5 Dams FE Leung KY van der Valk PH Kock MC Bosman J Niehof SP Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
description	Francina EM Dams,2 KY Esther Leung,1 Pieter HM van der Valk,2 Marc CJM Kock,2 Jeroen Bosman,1 Sjoerd P Niehof1 1Medical Physics and Technology, 2Department of Radiology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands Background: To inform cost-effective decisions in purchasing new medical liquid crystal displays, we compared the image quality in displays made by three manufacturers. Methods: We recruited 19 radiologists and residents to compare the image quality of four liquid crystal displays, including 3-megapixel Barco®, Eizo®, and NEC® displays and a 6-megapixel Barco display. The evaluators were blinded to the manufacturers' names. Technical assessments were based on acceptance criteria and test patterns proposed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Radiological assessments were performed on images from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18. They included X-ray images of the thorax, knee, and breast, a computed tomographic image of the thorax, and a magnetic resonance image of the brain. Image quality was scored on an analog scale (range 0–10). Statistical analysis was performed with repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results: The Barco 3-megapixel display passed all acceptance criteria. The Eizo and NEC displays passed the acceptance criteria, except for the darkest pixel value in the grayscale display function. The Barco 6-megapixel display failed criteria for the maximum luminance response and the veiling glare. Mean radiological assessment scores were 7.8±1.1 (Barco 3-megapixel), 7.8±1.2 (Eizo), 8.1±1.0 (NEC), and 8.1±1.0 (Barco 6-megapixel). No significant differences were found between displays. Conclusion: According to the tested criteria, all the displays had comparable image quality; however, there was a three-fold difference in price between the most and least expensive displays. Keywords: data display, humans, radiographic image enhancement, user-computer interface, liquid crystals
format	article
author	Dams FE Leung KY van der Valk PH Kock MC Bosman J Niehof SP
author_facet	Dams FE Leung KY van der Valk PH Kock MC Bosman J Niehof SP
author_sort	Dams FE
title	Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
title_short	Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
title_full	Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
title_fullStr	Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
title_full_unstemmed	Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
title_sort	technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2014
url	https://doaj.org/article/b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c
work_keys_str_mv	AT damsfe technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology AT leungky technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology AT vandervalkph technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology AT kockmc technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology AT bosmanj technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology AT niehofsp technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
_version_	1718401641964634112

Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiology

Ejemplares similares