Conclusion
The requirements for a clinical viewing station have some similarities to requirements of an interpretation workstation, but have some important differences. The user base is a heterogeneous group, and the tasks the clinicians perform vary substantially, increasing the variation in the requirements. However, it is possible to determine a list of requirements that satisfy most clinicians under most circumstances. In addition to the standard image manipulation tools, we have found that integration with the other clinical tools is essential to maintaining or increasing their efficiency. Providing for varying levels of functionality/complexity is also useful, because of the variation in the user base.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (493.7 KB).
References
- 1.Erickson B, Ryan W, Gehring D, et al. Clinician usage patterns of a desktop radiology information display application. J Digit Imaging. 1998;11(suppl 1):137–141. doi: 10.1007/BF03168285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Erickson BJ, Ryan WJ, Gehring DG, et al. Image display for clinicians on medical record workstations. J Digit Imaging. 1997;10(suppl 1):38–40. doi: 10.1007/BF03168653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Erickson BJ, Ryan WJ, Gehring DG, et al. Clinician image review patterns in an out-patient setting. In: Horii Blaine, et al., editors. SPIE Medical Imaging. San Diego, CA: SPIE; 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Eversman W, Pavlicek W, Zavalkovskiy BV, et al. Performance and function of a desktop viewer at Mayo Clinic Scottsdale. J Digit Imaging. 2000;13(suppl 1):147–152. doi: 10.1007/BF03167648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nielsen J. Usability Engineering. ed 1. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1993. pp. 362–362. [Google Scholar]