Comparison of medical-grade and calibrated consumer-grade displays for diagnosis of subtle bone fissures
- 131 Downloads
To compare the diagnostic accuracy of medical-grade and calibrated consumer-grade digital displays for the detection of subtle bone fissures.
Three experienced radiologists assessed 96 digital radiographs, 40 without and 56 with subtle bone fissures, for the presence or absence of fissures in various bones using one consumer-grade and two medical-grade displays calibrated according to the DICOM-Grayscale Standard Display Function. The reference standard was consensus reading. Subjective image quality was also assessed by the three readers. Statistical analysis was performed using receiver operating characteristic analysis and by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, and Youden’s J for each combination of reader and display. Cohen’s unweighted kappa was calculated to assess inter-rater agreement. Subjective image quality was compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
No significant differences were found for the assessment of subjective image quality. Diagnostic performance was similar across all readers and displays, with Youden’s J ranging from 0.443 to 0.661. The differences were influenced more by the reader than by the display used for the assessment.
No significant differences were found between medical-grade and calibrated consumer-grade displays with regard to their diagnostic performance in assessing subtle bone fissures. Calibrated consumer-grade displays may be sufficient for most radiological examinations.
• Diagnostic performance of calibrated consumer-grade displays is comparable to medical-grade displays.
• There is no significant difference with regard to subjective image quality.
• Use of calibrated consumer-grade displays could cut display costs by 60-80%.
KeywordsQuality Assurance, Health Care Radiography Fractures, Bone Diagnostic Imaging Computer Terminals
Abbreviations and acronyms
Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine
Grayscale Standard Display Function
liquid crystal displays
picture archiving and communication systems
receiver operating characteristic
area under the curve
The authors thank Ms. Helen Toder and Ms. Franziska Inka Meyer for their support in conducting this study and for their help with data collection. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Veronika Weyer-Elberich for her help in planning the statistical analysis for this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof. Dr. Peter Mildenberger.
Conflict of interest
The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, that have products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.
The authors state that this work has not received any funding.
Statistics and biometry
Ms. Dr. Veronika Weyer- Elberich kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript.
Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.
Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.
•performed at one institution
- 3.German Institute for Standardization. Image quality assurance in diagnostic X-ray departments - Part 157: X-ray ordinance acceptance and constancy test of image display systems in their environment (2014). Available via https://www.beuth.de/de/norm/din-6868-157/216064441
- 4.Food and Drug Administration. Display Accessories for Full-Field Digital Mammography Systems-Premarket Notification (510(k)) (2008). Available via http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm107549.htm
- 5.Likert R (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 22:55Google Scholar
- 10.Ekpo EU, McEntee MF (2016) An Evaluation of Performance Characteristics of Primary Display Devices. J Digit Imaging 29):175–182Google Scholar
- 18.Kim C, Cha H, Kang BS, Choi HJ, Lim TH, Oh J (2015) A Feasibility Study of Smartphone-Based Telesonography for Evaluating Cardiac Dynamic Function and Diagnosing Acute Appendicitis with Control of the Image Quality of the Transmitted Videos. J Digit Imaging 29:347–356CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 21.Kawasumi Y, Yamada T, Ota H, Tsuboi M, Takase K, Sato A et al (2008) High-resolution monochrome liquid crystal display versus efficient household colour liquid crystal display: comparison of their diagnostic performance with unenhanced CT images in focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 18:2148–2154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar