Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nationwide survey on the current situation of quality control of diagnostic displays in Japan

  • Special Report
  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Japan Association of Radiological Technologists (JART) and the Japan Medical Imaging and Radiological Systems Industries Association jointly conducted a nationwide survey to reveal the current situation of diagnostic displays in Japan using a questionnaire on the performance and quality control (QC) of diagnostic displays for mammography and common use. The questionnaire for radiological technologists (RTs) was distributed via email to 4519 medical facilities throughout Japan, where RTs affiliated with JART were employed; 613 (13.6%) facilities responded. Diagnostic displays with suitable maximal luminance (500 cd/m2 or higher for mammography and 350 cd/m2 or higher for common use) and resolution (5 megapixels for mammography) have been widely used. However, while 99% of the facilities recognized the necessity of QC, only approximately 60% implemented it. This situation arose due to several barriers to QC implementation, such as insufficient devices, time, staff, knowledge, and the recognition of QC as a duty. The implementation of QC can lead to the avoidance of incidents or accidents caused by a decrease in luminance, variation in luminance response, and the influence of ambient light. Moreover, the barriers discouraging the implementation of QC are mainly related to a lack of human resources and budgets. Therefore, to popularize the QC of diagnostic displays in all facilities, it is crucial to identify countermeasures to eliminate these barriers and to continue positive actions for popularization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Japan Radiological Society (JRS). Guidelines for handling digital images 3.0 (in Japanese). 2015. http://www.radiology.jp/content/files/20150417.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  2. The Japan Central Organization on Quality Assurance of Breast Cancer Screening (QABCS). Correction of required items for softcopy facility image evaluation (in Japanese). 2015. https://www.qabcs.or.jp/archives/005/201512/20151210HPsoftcopy.pdf.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  3. Japan Medical Imaging and Radiological Systems Industries Association (JIRA). Results of fact-finding survey on display quality control (in Japanese). 2013. https://www.jira-net.or.jp/publishing/files/monitor/20140411_pamphlet.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  4. Fujii M, Sato H, Higashimura K, et al. Results of questionnaire survey for revision of medical service fee in FY 2020 (in Japanese). J JART. 2020;67:300–8.

    Google Scholar 

  5. The Japan Central Organization on Quality Assurance of Breast Cancer Screening. The quality control manual on digital mammography (in Japanese). 2nd ed. Nagoya: Igaku-shoin; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Japan Medical Imaging and Radiological Systems Industries Association (JIRA). JESRA X-0093*B-2017 Quality Assurance (QA) Guideline for Medical Imaging Display Systems (in Japanese). 2017. https://www.jira-net.or.jp/publishing/files/jesra/JESRA_X-0093B_2017.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  7. American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). AAPM Report No. 270. Display quality assurance. 2019. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_270.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  8. National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). DICOM PS3.14 2022b—Grayscale standard display function. https://dicom.nema.org/medical/dicom/current/output/pdf/part14.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  9. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al. AAPM Online Report No. 03. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems. 2005. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/or_03.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2022.

  10. Norweck JT, Seibert A, Andriole KP, et al. ACR-AAPM-SIIM technical standard for electronic practice of medical imaging. J Digit Imaging. 2013;26:38–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-012-9522-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. International Electrotechnical Committee (IEC). IEC 62563-2:2021 Medical electrical equipment—Medical image display systems—part 2: acceptance and constancy tests for medical image displays. 2021. https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/62979. Accessed 10 Nov 2022.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We express our gratitude to the Japan Association of Radiological Technologists (JART) president Katsuhiko Ueda, who provided the results of the survey, and to other JART members who participated in the survey, as well as chairperson Masayo Fujii and all members of the Medical Fee Policymaking Committee, who performed the survey. We also thank the JART vice president Naoki Kodama, Ph.D., and Atsushi Endo, Ph.D. (Sosei Health Insurance Association Clinic), for their advice during the drafting of this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Imaging System Division, Japan Medical Imaging and Radiological Systems Industries Association, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Tetsuya Yasuda, Kazuya Maeda, Daisuke Ogoshi, Masumi Kanesaki, Hiroaki Takano & Keiichi Nishikawa

  2. Healthcare Products Research and Development Department, EIZO Corporation, Hakusan, Ishikawa, Japan

    Tetsuya Yasuda

  3. Sales Engineering Department, EIZO Corporation, Shinagawa-Ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Kazuya Maeda

  4. Healthcare Business Operation, JVCKENWOOD Corporation, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan

    Daisuke Ogoshi

  5. Surgical and Modality Division, Barco Co., Ltd., Ota-Ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Masumi Kanesaki

  6. Business Strategy and Planning Division Healthcare Business Headquarters, KONICA MINOLTA, INC., Hino, Tokyo, Japan

    Hiroaki Takano

  7. Department of Chemistry, Tokyo Dental College, Chiyoda-Ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Keiichi Nishikawa

Authors
  1. Tetsuya Yasuda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kazuya Maeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daisuke Ogoshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Masumi Kanesaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hiroaki Takano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Keiichi Nishikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tetsuya Yasuda.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethical approval

No approval of research ethics committees was required to accomplish the goals of this study because the experimental work did not involve human participants or animals.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yasuda, T., Maeda, K., Ogoshi, D. et al. Nationwide survey on the current situation of quality control of diagnostic displays in Japan. Radiol Phys Technol 16, 325–337 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00723-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00723-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation