HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2342031297v1 234/2/611    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Scharitzer, M. Articles by Schaefer-Prokop, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Scharitzer, M. Articles by Schaefer-Prokop, C.

Detectability of Catheters on Bedside Chest Radiographs: Comparison between Liquid Crystal Display and High-Resolution Cathode-Ray Tube Monitors¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology and Ludwig Boltzmann-Institute for Clinical and Experimental Radiologic Research, University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18–20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Received August 14, 2003; revision requested October 28; revision received March 18, 2004; accepted May 17. Address correspondence to M.S. (e-mail: martina.scharitzer@meduniwien.ac.at).

PURPOSE: To compare observer performance with a flat-panel liquid crystal display (LCD) monitor and with a high-resolution gray-scale cathode-ray tube (CRT) monitor in the detection of simulated support catheters on bedside chest radiographs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ethics committee did not require approval or patient informed consent when this study began. Because of a change in regulations, before images were acquired the nature of the study and procedures were explained to patients or their relatives, and consent was then obtained. A total of 131 catheter fragments (12–14 per radiograph) were superimposed over 10 anteroposterior bedside chest radiographs obtained with storage phosphor technology. Images were displayed on an LCD monitor (1536 x 2048 matrix) and a CRT monitor (2048 x 2560 matrix). Five radiologists independently located the catheter fragments and rated their confidence in detection with bright and subdued ambient light. A two-way analysis of variance and the Friedman test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS: There was no significant difference for either display type with respect to correctly detected catheter fragments (mean sensitivity, 56.6% and 56.0% for the CRT and the LCD monitors, respectively, with bright light and 61.2% for both monitors with subdued light). With both display types, detection rate with bright light decreased significantly (P < .05). False-positive rates and confidence ratings were not significantly affected by monitor type or ambient light.

CONCLUSION: In a study with simulation of clinical conditions, performance of the LCD monitor and high-resolution CRT monitor for detection of support catheters on bedside chest radiographs was equivalent. With both displays, detection performance was equally reduced with bright ambient light.

© RSNA, 2004

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N Buls, W Shabana, P Verbeek, P Pevenage, and J De Mey Influence of display quality on radiologists' performance in the detection of lung nodules on radiographs Br. J. Radiol., September 1, 2007; 80(957): 738 - 743. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. C. Brennan, M. McEntee, M. Evanoff, P. Phillips, W. T. O'Connor, and D. J. Manning Ambient Lighting: Effect of Illumination on Soft-Copy Viewing of Radiographs of the Wrist Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): W177 - W180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. P. McAdams, E. Samei, J. Dobbins III, G. D. Tourassi, and C. E. Ravin Recent Advances in Chest Radiography Radiology, December 1, 2006; 241(3): 663 - 683. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]