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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dams FE, Leung KY, van der Valk PH, Kock MC, Bosman J, Niehof SP
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Dove Medical Press 2014-10-01
Series:Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
Online Access:http://www.dovepress.com/technical-and-radiological-image-quality-comparison-of-different-liqui-peer-reviewed-article-MDER
id doaj-b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b043fce77a5143a68cf0d27f94887a0c2020-11-25T02:04:12ZengDove Medical PressMedical Devices : Evidence and Research1179-14702014-10-012014default37137718985Technical and radiological image quality comparison of different liquid crystal displays for radiologyDams FELeung KYvan der Valk PHKock MCBosman JNiehof SP 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 crystalshttp://www.dovepress.com/technical-and-radiological-image-quality-comparison-of-different-liqui-peer-reviewed-article-MDER
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dams FE
Leung KY
van der Valk PH
Kock MC
Bosman J
Niehof SP
spellingShingle 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
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
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
series Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
issn 1179-1470
publishDate 2014-10-01
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
url http://www.dovepress.com/technical-and-radiological-image-quality-comparison-of-different-liqui-peer-reviewed-article-MDER
work_keys_str_mv AT damsfe technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
AT leungky technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
AT vandervalkph technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
AT kockmc technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
AT bosmanj technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
AT niehofsp technicalandradiologicalimagequalitycomparisonofdifferentliquidcrystaldisplaysforradiology
_version_ 1724943899306229760