Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether digitized analog images displayed on a digital workstation can be improved by using a preprocessing algorithm, and if so, whether the quality of the resulting images can reach that of the original films. The material contained 120 difficult cases (about 50% with selected pathology). Four radiologists each evaluated half of the randomly ordered cases with the digital workstation and half of the cases with the original radiographs. The data were compared with a previous similar study, where the workstation had no option for preprocessed images. Preprocessed digital images were clearly superior to digital images without preprocessing, although for those of the highest diagnostic difficulty they were inferior to the original films. The preprocessing algorithm has improved the diagnostic quality of the digital workstation. There is room yet for improvement compared to plain films, although the current setup may be sufficient in some settings.
Key words: teleradiology, image processing, histogram equalization, radiology, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (1.3 MB).
Footnotes
Supported by the University Hospital of Tromsø, Telenor Research and Development, and the Norwegian Cancer Society.
References
- 1.Andrus WS, Dreyfuss JR, Jaffer F, et al. Interpretation of roentgenograms via interactive television. Radiology. 1975;116:25–31. doi: 10.1148/116.1.25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Curtis DJ, Gayler BW, Gitlin JN, et al. Teleradiology: Results of a field trial. Radiology. 1993;149:415–418. doi: 10.1148/radiology.149.2.6622684. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Slovis TL, Guzzardo-Dobson PR. The clinical usefulness of teleradiology of neonates: Expanded services without expanded staff. Pediatr Radiol. 1991;21:333–335. doi: 10.1007/BF02011480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Størmer J, Bolle SR, Sund T, et al. ROC-study of a teleradiology workstation versus film readings. Acta Radiol. 1997;38:176–180. doi: 10.3109/02841859709171264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Razavi M, Sayre JW, Simons M, et al. Clinical evaluation of a 2K × 2K workstation for primary diagnosis in pediatric radiology. In: Jost RG, et al., editors. Medical Imaging V: PACS Design and Evaluation. San Jose, CA: The International Society for Optical Engineering; 1991. pp. 24–31. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Scott WW, Bluemke DA, Mysko WK, et al. Interpretation of emergency medicine physicians: Teleradiology workstation versus radiograph readings. Radiology. 1995;195:223–229. doi: 10.1148/radiology.195.1.7892474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Scott WW, Rosenbaum JE, Ackerman SJ, et al. Subtle orthopedic fractures: Teleradiology workstation versus film interpretation. Radiology. 1993;187:811–815. doi: 10.1148/radiology.187.3.8497636. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Pizer SM, Amburn EP, Austin JD, et al. Adaptive histogram equalization and its variations. Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing. 1987;39:355–368. doi: 10.1016/S0734-189X(87)80186-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kirkwood BR. Essentials of Medical Statistics. Oxford: Blackwell; 1988. pp. 87–991. [Google Scholar]