Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Digital Imaging 4/2009

01-08-2009

Evaluating Interaction Techniques for Stack Mode Viewing

Authors: M. Stella Atkins, Jennifer Fernquist, Arthur E. Kirkpatrick, Bruce B. Forster

Published in: Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Three interaction techniques were evaluated for scrolling stack mode displays of volumetric data. Two used a scroll-wheel mouse: one used only the wheel, while another used a “click and drag” technique for fast scrolling, leaving the wheel for fine adjustments. The third technique used a Shuttle Xpress jog wheel. In a within-subjects design, nine radiologists searched stacked images for simulated hyper-intense regions on brain, knee, and thigh MR studies. Dependent measures were speed, accuracy, navigation path, and user preference. The radiologists considered the task realistic. They had high inter-subject variability in completion times, far larger than the differences between techniques. Most radiologists (eight out of nine) preferred familiar mouse-based techniques. Most participants scanned the data in two passes, first locating anomalies, then scanning for omissions. Participants spent a mean 10.4 s/trial exploring anomalies, with only mild variation between participants. Their rates of forward navigation searching for anomalies varied much more. Interaction technique significantly affected forward navigation rate (scroll wheel 5.4 slices/s, click and drag 9.4, and jog wheel 6.9). It is not clear what constrained the slowest navigators. The fastest navigator used a unique strategy of moving quickly just beyond an anomaly, then backing up. Eight naïve students performed a similar protocol. Their times and variability were similar to the radiologists, but more (three out of eight) students preferred the jog wheel. It may be worthwhile to introduce techniques such as the jog wheel to radiologists during training, and several techniques might be provided on workstations, allowing individuals to choose their preferred method.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Siddiqui K: Evolution of the digital revolution: a radiologist perspective. J Digit Imaging 16:324–330, 2003PubMedCrossRef Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Siddiqui K: Evolution of the digital revolution: a radiologist perspective. J Digit Imaging 16:324–330, 2003PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Krupinski EA, Mincilla R, Sewell P, Steiner E, Widlus D: Value of image motion in detecting stenoses. Proceedings SCAR 10–11, 2006 Krupinski EA, Mincilla R, Sewell P, Steiner E, Widlus D: Value of image motion in detecting stenoses. Proceedings SCAR 10–11, 2006
3.
go back to reference Ellis SM, Hu X, Dempere-Marco L, Yang GZ, Wells AU, Hansell DM: Thin-section CT of the lungs: eye-tracking analysis of the visual approach to reading tiled and stacked display formats. Eur J Radiol 59:257–264, 2006PubMedCrossRef Ellis SM, Hu X, Dempere-Marco L, Yang GZ, Wells AU, Hansell DM: Thin-section CT of the lungs: eye-tracking analysis of the visual approach to reading tiled and stacked display formats. Eur J Radiol 59:257–264, 2006PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kim YJ, Han JK, Kim SH, Jeong JY, An SK, Han CJ, Son KR, Lee KH, Lee JM, Choi BI: Small bowel obstruction in a phantom model of ex vivo porcine intestine: comparison of PACS stack and tile modes for CT interpretation. Radiology 236:867–871, 2005PubMedCrossRef Kim YJ, Han JK, Kim SH, Jeong JY, An SK, Han CJ, Son KR, Lee KH, Lee JM, Choi BI: Small bowel obstruction in a phantom model of ex vivo porcine intestine: comparison of PACS stack and tile modes for CT interpretation. Radiology 236:867–871, 2005PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Mathie AG, Strickland NH: Interpretation of CT scans with PACS image display in stack mode. Radiology 203:207–209, 1997PubMed Mathie AG, Strickland NH: Interpretation of CT scans with PACS image display in stack mode. Radiology 203:207–209, 1997PubMed
6.
go back to reference Krupinski EA, Kallergi M: Choosing a radiology workstation: technical and clinical considerations. Radiology 242:671–682, 2007PubMedCrossRef Krupinski EA, Kallergi M: Choosing a radiology workstation: technical and clinical considerations. Radiology 242:671–682, 2007PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference van der Heyden JE, Inkpen KM, Atkins MS, Carpendale MST: Exploring presentation methods for tomographic medical image viewing. Artif Intell Med 22:89–109, 2001PubMedCrossRef van der Heyden JE, Inkpen KM, Atkins MS, Carpendale MST: Exploring presentation methods for tomographic medical image viewing. Artif Intell Med 22:89–109, 2001PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Moise A, Atkins MS: Interaction techniques for radiology workstations: impact on users’ productivity. Proc SPIE Medical Imaging 5371:16–22, 2004 Moise A, Atkins MS: Interaction techniques for radiology workstations: impact on users’ productivity. Proc SPIE Medical Imaging 5371:16–22, 2004
9.
go back to reference Atkins MS, Kirkpatrick AE, Knight A, Forster B: Evaluating user interfaces for stack mode viewing. Proc SPIE Medical Imaging 6515:65150A1–A10, 2007 Atkins MS, Kirkpatrick AE, Knight A, Forster B: Evaluating user interfaces for stack mode viewing. Proc SPIE Medical Imaging 6515:65150A1–A10, 2007
10.
go back to reference Teistler M, Breiman RS, Lison T, Bott OJ, Pretschner DP, Aziz A, Nowinski WL: Simplifying the exploration of volumetric Images: development of a 3D user interface for the radiologist’s workplace. J Digit Imaging, doi:10.1007/s10278-007-9025-8, Mar 27, 2007 Teistler M, Breiman RS, Lison T, Bott OJ, Pretschner DP, Aziz A, Nowinski WL: Simplifying the exploration of volumetric Images: development of a 3D user interface for the radiologist’s workplace. J Digit Imaging, doi:10.​1007/​s10278-007-9025-8, Mar 27, 2007
11.
go back to reference Wang XH, Durick JE, Lu A, Herbert DL, Golla SK, Foley K, Piracha CS, Shinde DD, Shindel BE, Fuhrman CR, Britton CA, Strollo DC, Shang SS, Lacomis JM, Good WF: Characterization of radiologists’ search strategies for lung nodule detection: slice-based versus volumetric displays. J Digit Imaging, doi:10.1007/s10278-007-9076-x, September 15, 2007 Wang XH, Durick JE, Lu A, Herbert DL, Golla SK, Foley K, Piracha CS, Shinde DD, Shindel BE, Fuhrman CR, Britton CA, Strollo DC, Shang SS, Lacomis JM, Good WF: Characterization of radiologists search strategies for lung nodule detection: slice-based versus volumetric displays. J Digit Imaging, doi:10.​1007/​s10278-007-9076-x, September 15, 2007
12.
go back to reference Sherbondy AJ, Homlund D, Rubin GD, Schraedley PK, Winograd T, Napel S: Alternative input devices for efficient navigation of large CT angiography data sets. Radiology 234:391–398, 2005PubMedCrossRef Sherbondy AJ, Homlund D, Rubin GD, Schraedley PK, Winograd T, Napel S: Alternative input devices for efficient navigation of large CT angiography data sets. Radiology 234:391–398, 2005PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Weiss DL, Siddiqui KM, Scopelliti J: Radiologist assessment of PACS user interface devices. J Am Coll Radiol 3:265–273, 2006PubMedCrossRef Weiss DL, Siddiqui KM, Scopelliti J: Radiologist assessment of PACS user interface devices. J Am Coll Radiol 3:265–273, 2006PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Moise A, Atkins MS, Rohling R: Evaluating different radiology workstation interaction techniques with radiologists and laypersons. J Digit Imaging 18:116–130, 2005PubMedCrossRef Moise A, Atkins MS, Rohling R: Evaluating different radiology workstation interaction techniques with radiologists and laypersons. J Digit Imaging 18:116–130, 2005PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Evaluating Interaction Techniques for Stack Mode Viewing
Authors
M. Stella Atkins
Jennifer Fernquist
Arthur E. Kirkpatrick
Bruce B. Forster
Publication date
01-08-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 2948-2925
Electronic ISSN: 2948-2933
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-008-9140-1

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

Journal of Digital Imaging 4/2009 Go to the issue