Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 141–145 | Cite as

Development of a tool to aid the radiologic technologist using augmented reality and computer vision

  • Robert D. MacDougallEmail author
  • Benoit Scherrer
  • Steven Don
Technical Innovation


This technical innovation describes the development of a novel device to aid technologists in reducing exposure variation and repeat imaging in computed and digital radiography. The device consists of a color video and depth camera in combination with proprietary software and user interface. A monitor in the x-ray control room displays the position of the patient in real time with respect to automatic exposure control chambers and image receptor area. The thickness of the body part of interest is automatically displayed along with a motion indicator for the examined body part. The aim is to provide an automatic measurement of patient thickness to set the x-ray technique and to assist the technologist in detecting errors in positioning and motion before the patient is exposed. The device has the potential to reduce the incidence of repeat imaging by addressing problems technologists encounter daily during the acquisition of radiographs.


Augmented reality Children Computed radiography Computer vision Digital radiography Radiation dose Technical innovation 



This work was supported by the Society for Pediatric Radiology Research and Education Foundation Pilot Award and the Washington University Bear Cub Grant. Intellectual property is covered by claims of U.S. pending patent application identified as serial number 15/100,022.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Foos DH, Sehnert WJ, Reiner B et al (2009) Digital radiography reject analysis: data collection methodology, results, and recommendations from an in-depth investigation at two hospitals. J Digit Imaging 22:89–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Little KJ, Reiser I, Liu L et al (2017) Unified database for rejected image analysis across multiple vendors in radiography. J Am Coll Radiol 14:208–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones AK, Heintz P, Geiser W et al (2015) Ongoing quality control in digital radiography: report of AAPM imaging physics committee task group 151. Med Phys 42:6658–6670CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Don S, Macdougall R, Strauss K et al (2013) Image gently campaign back to basics initiative: ten steps to help manage radiation dose in pediatric digital radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:W431–W436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kleinman PL, Strauss KJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Patient size measured on CT images as a function of age at a tertiary care children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1611–1619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert D. MacDougall
    • 1
    Email author
  • Benoit Scherrer
    • 1
  • Steven Don
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyBoston Children’s HospitalBostonUSA
  2. 2.Mallinckrodt Institute of RadiologyWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations