Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Medical Systems 4/2012

01-08-2012 | Original Paper

Managing Repeat Digital Radiography Images—A Systematic Approach and Improvement

Authors: Wen-Sheng Tzeng, Kuang-Ming Kuo, Chung-Feng Liu, Huan-Chung Yao, Chin-Yu Chen, Huang-Wei Lin

Published in: Journal of Medical Systems | Issue 4/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Repeat analysis is an important issue for improving image quality in the field of radiology. However, the required data for repeat analysis is not easy to collect, and the accuracy of the analysis results remains controversial. The main purpose of this study is to introduce a systematic approach and, with the assistance of information technology, to improve the accuracy of data collection methods and repeat analysis in a fully digital environment. Another purpose of the study was to reduce the human resources required to maintain image quality on a daily basis. The main participant in this study is the radiology department of a medical center in Taiwan. The hospital had previously implemented a Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS), which was seamlessly integrated with Radiology Information Systems (RIS) and Hospital Information Systems (HIS). A comprehensive mechanism was built for repeat analysis. The analysis was primarily achieved through comparing the difference between the amount of accumulated digital radiography (DR) images and uploaded PACS images with data mining tools. Initially, the radiologic technologists seemed to be resistant to the new quality assurance mechanism, which introduce inaccuracy into the collected data. However, after introducing the improved standard operating procedures with the proposed approach for radiologic technologists, the number of DR images generated became optimal for comparison with the number of PACS images, which made this mechanism feasible. Furthermore, information was collected regarding the reasons for repeat images and was used for improving image quality. The results revealed that the new mechanism was both effective and accurate in the analysis of repeat images.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Linton, O. W., Properzio, W. S., and Steele, J. P., Quality assurance: an idea whose time has come. Am. J. Roentgenol. 133:989–992, 1979. Linton, O. W., Properzio, W. S., and Steele, J. P., Quality assurance: an idea whose time has come. Am. J. Roentgenol. 133:989–992, 1979.
2.
go back to reference World Health Organization, Quality assurance in diagnostic radiology. World Health Organization, Geneva, 1982. World Health Organization, Quality assurance in diagnostic radiology. World Health Organization, Geneva, 1982.
3.
go back to reference Schandorf, C., and Tetteh, G., Analysis of the status of X-ray diagnosis in Ghana. Brit. J. Radiol 71:1040–1048, 1998. Schandorf, C., and Tetteh, G., Analysis of the status of X-ray diagnosis in Ghana. Brit. J. Radiol 71:1040–1048, 1998.
4.
go back to reference Dunn, M. A., and Rogers, A. T., X-ray film reject analysis as a quality indicator. Radiography 4:29–31, 1998.CrossRef Dunn, M. A., and Rogers, A. T., X-ray film reject analysis as a quality indicator. Radiography 4:29–31, 1998.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Prieto, C., Vano, E., Ten, J., et al., Image retake analysis in digital radiography using DICOM header information. J. Digit. Imaging 22:393–399, 2009.CrossRef Prieto, C., Vano, E., Ten, J., et al., Image retake analysis in digital radiography using DICOM header information. J. Digit. Imaging 22:393–399, 2009.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rogers, K. D., Matthews, I. P., and Roberts, C. J., Variation in repeat rates between 18 radiology departments. Brit. J. Radiol 60:463–468, 1987.CrossRef Rogers, K. D., Matthews, I. P., and Roberts, C. J., Variation in repeat rates between 18 radiology departments. Brit. J. Radiol 60:463–468, 1987.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Clark, P. A., and Hogg, P., Reject/repeat analysis and the effect prior film viewing has on a department’s reject/repeat rate. Radiography 9:127–137, 2003.CrossRef Clark, P. A., and Hogg, P., Reject/repeat analysis and the effect prior film viewing has on a department’s reject/repeat rate. Radiography 9:127–137, 2003.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Farman, A. G., ALARA still applies. Oral. Surg. Oral Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod. 100:395–397, 2005.CrossRef Farman, A. G., ALARA still applies. Oral. Surg. Oral Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod. 100:395–397, 2005.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Nol, J., Isouard, G., and Mirecki, J., Digital repeat analysis; setup and operation. J. Digit. Imaging 19:159–166, 2006.CrossRef Nol, J., Isouard, G., and Mirecki, J., Digital repeat analysis; setup and operation. J. Digit. Imaging 19:159–166, 2006.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Weatherburn, G. C., Bryan, S., and West, M., A comparison of image reject rates when using film, hard copy computed radiography and soft copy images on picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) workstations. Brit. J. Radiol. 72:653–660, 1999. Weatherburn, G. C., Bryan, S., and West, M., A comparison of image reject rates when using film, hard copy computed radiography and soft copy images on picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) workstations. Brit. J. Radiol. 72:653–660, 1999.
11.
go back to reference Peer, S., Peer, R., Walcher, M., et al., Comparative reject analysis in conventional film-screen and digital storage phosphor radiography. Eur. Radiol. 9:1693–1696, 1999.CrossRef Peer, S., Peer, R., Walcher, M., et al., Comparative reject analysis in conventional film-screen and digital storage phosphor radiography. Eur. Radiol. 9:1693–1696, 1999.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Akhtar, W., Aslam, M., Ali, A., et al., Film retakes in digital and conventional radiography. J. Coll. Physicians Surg. Pak. 18:151–153, 2008. Akhtar, W., Aslam, M., Ali, A., et al., Film retakes in digital and conventional radiography. J. Coll. Physicians Surg. Pak. 18:151–153, 2008.
13.
go back to reference Foos, D., Sehnert, W., Reiner, B., et al., Digital radiography reject analysis: data collection methodology, results, and recommendations from an in-depth investigation at two hospitals. J. Digit. Imaging 22:89–98, 2009.CrossRef Foos, D., Sehnert, W., Reiner, B., et al., Digital radiography reject analysis: data collection methodology, results, and recommendations from an in-depth investigation at two hospitals. J. Digit. Imaging 22:89–98, 2009.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Honea, R., Blado, M. E., and Ma, Y., Is reject analysis necessary after converting to computed radiography? J. Digit. Imaging 15:41–52, 2002.CrossRef Honea, R., Blado, M. E., and Ma, Y., Is reject analysis necessary after converting to computed radiography? J. Digit. Imaging 15:41–52, 2002.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Lau, S.-L., Mak, A. S.-H., Lam, W.-T., et al., Reject analysis: a comparison of conventional film-screen radiography and computed radiography with PACS. Radiography 10:183–187, 2004.CrossRef Lau, S.-L., Mak, A. S.-H., Lam, W.-T., et al., Reject analysis: a comparison of conventional film-screen radiography and computed radiography with PACS. Radiography 10:183–187, 2004.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Dowling AF: Do Hospital Staff Interfere with Computer System Implementation? Health Care Manage R 5:23-32, 1980. Dowling AF: Do Hospital Staff Interfere with Computer System Implementation? Health Care Manage R 5:23-32, 1980.
Metadata
Title
Managing Repeat Digital Radiography Images—A Systematic Approach and Improvement
Authors
Wen-Sheng Tzeng
Kuang-Ming Kuo
Chung-Feng Liu
Huan-Chung Yao
Chin-Yu Chen
Huang-Wei Lin
Publication date
01-08-2012
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Medical Systems / Issue 4/2012
Print ISSN: 0148-5598
Electronic ISSN: 1573-689X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-011-9744-8

Other articles of this Issue 4/2012

Journal of Medical Systems 4/2012 Go to the issue