Diagnostic efficacy of handheld devices for emergency radiologic consultation

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 194, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 469-474

  Toomey, Rachel J ^a   Ryan, John T ^a   McEntee, Mark F ^a   Evanoff, Michael G ^b   Chakraborty, Dev P ^c   McNulty, Jonathan P ^a   Manning, David J ^d   Thomas, Edel M ^a   Brennan, Patrick C ^a,e  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b American Board of Radiology   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CUMBRIA   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Handheld devices, teleradiology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EMERGENCY; HUMAN; IPOD TOUCH DEVICE; MICROCOMPUTER; PERSONAL DIGITAL ASSISTANT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RADIOLOGIST; TELECONSULTATION;

BRAIN INJURIES; COMPUTERS, HANDHELD; DATA DISPLAY; EMERGENCIES; HUMANS; RADIOLOGY; ROC CURVE; SOFTWARE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; WRIST INJURIES;

EID: 76149111111     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.3418     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. McLeod TG, Ebbert JO, Lymp JF. Survey assessment of personal digital assistant use among trainees and attending physicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2003; 10:605-607
2. Boonn WW, Flanders AE. Informatics in radiology (infoRAD): survey of personal digital assistant use in radiology. RadioGraphics 2005; 25: 537-541
3. Flanders AE, Wiggins RH III, Gozum ME. Handheld computers in radiology. RadioGraphics 2003; 23:1035-1047
4. Nishino M, Busch JM, Wei J, Barbaras L, Yam CS, Hatabu H. Use of personal digital assistants in diagnostic radiology resident education. Acad Radiol 2004; 11:1153-1158
5. Yam CS. Projecting PowerPoint presentations with a PDA. AJR 2005; 184:1356-1359
6. Andrade R, von Wangenheim A, Kessler Bortoluzzi M. Wireless and PDA: a novel strategy to access DICOM-compliant medical data on mobile devices. Int J Med Inform 2003; 71:157-163
7. Nakata N, Kandatsu S, Suzuki N, Fukuda K. Informatics in radiology (infoRAD): mobile wireless DICOM server system and PDA with highresolution display: feasibility of group work for radiologists. RadioGraphics 2005; 25:273-283
8. Kim DK, Yoo SK, Park JJ, Kim SH. PDA-phonebased instant transmission of radiological images over a CDMA network by combining the PACS screen with a Bluetooth-interfaced local wireless link. J Digit Imaging 2007; 20:131-139
9. Kim DK, Yoo SK, Kim SH. Instant wireless transmission of radiological images using a personal digital assistant phone for emergency teleconsultation. J Telemed Telecare 2005; 11[suppl 2]:S58-S61
10. Raman B, Raman R, Raman L, Beaulieu CF. Radiology on handheld devices: image display, manipulation, and PACS integration issues. Radio-Graphics 2004; 24:299-310
11. Yamamoto LG, Williams DR. A demonstration of instant pocket wireless CT teleradiology to facilitate stat neurosurgical consultation and future telemedicine implications. Am J Emerg Med 2000; 18:423-426
12. Reponen J, Ilkko E, Jyrkinen L, et al. Initial experience with a wireless personal digital assistant as a teleradiology terminal for reporting emergency computerized tomography scans. J Telemed Telecare 2000; 6:45-49
13. Kondo Y. Medical image transfer for emergency care utilizing internet and mobile phone. Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2002; 58:1393-1401
14. Johnston WK 3rd, Patel BN, Low RK, Das S. Wireless teleradiology for renal colic and renal trauma. J Endourol 2005; 19:32-36
15. Yaghmai V, Kuppuswami S, Berlin JW, Salehi SA. Evaluation of personal digital assistants as an interpretation medium for computed tomography of patients with intracranial injury. Emerg Radiol 2003; 10:87-89
16. Salo S, Salo H, Liisanantti A, Reponen J. Data transmission in dental identification of mass disaster victims. J Forensic Odontostomatol 2007; 25:17-22
17. Digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM). Part 14. Grayscale display standard function. NEMA PS 3.14-2007. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) Website. http://www.nema.org/stds. Published December 2006. Accessed June 12, 2009
18. American Association of Medical Physics Website. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18. ils. unc.edu/bmh/pubs/Assessment-of-display-performance- for-medical-imaging-systems-MedicalPhysics-2005.pdf. Published March 31, 2005. Accessed November 28, 2009
19. Metz CE. Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological ROC studies. Invest Radiol 1989; 24:234-245
20. Brennan PC, McEntee M, Evanoff M, Phillips P, O'Connor WT, Manning DJ. Ambient lighting: effect of illumination on soft-copy viewing of radiographs of the wrist. AJR 2007; 188:520; [web] W177-W180
21. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol 1992; 27:723-731
22. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV, Chen YF, Donaghy BA. Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: factorial experimental design. Acad Radiol 1998; 5:591-602
23. Hillis SL, Berbaum KS. Power estimation for the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. Acad Radiol 2004; 11:1260-1273
24. Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Schartz KM, Berbaum KS. A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data. Stat Med 2005; 24:1579-1607
25. Hillis SL. Monte Carlo validation of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method using normalized pseudovalues and less data-based model simplifi-cation. Acad Radiol 2005; 12:1534-1541
26. Hillis SL. A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom for multiple observer ROC analysis. Stat Med 2007; 26:596-619
27. Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol 2008; 15:647-661
28. Tapiovaara M. Relationships between physical measurements and user evaluation of image quality in medical radiology: a review. STUK A219. Helsinki, Finland: Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK). http://www.stuk.fi/ julkaisut/ stuk-a/stuk-a219.pdf. Published September 2006. Accessed December 18, 2007
29. Sandborg M, Tingberg A, Dance DR, et al. Demonstration of correlations between clinical and physical image quality measures in chest and lumbar spine screen-film radiography. Br J Radiol 2001; 74:520-528
30. Ullman G, Sandborg M, Tingberg A, et al. Comparison of clinical and physical measures of image quality in chest PA and pelvis AP views at varying tube voltages. 2004 Report 98. Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University. http://huweb.hu.liu.se/ inst/imv/radiofysik/pdfs/Rep98.pdf. Published December 2004. Accessed January 29, 2007
31. Metz CE, Wagner RF, Doi K, Brown DG, Nishikawa RM, Myers KJ. Toward consensus on quantitative assessment of medical imaging systems. Med Phys 1995; 22:1057-1061
32. Walsh C, Dowling A, Meade A, Malone J. Subjective and objective measures of image quality in digital fluoroscopy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 117:34-37
33. Gur D, Klym AH, King JL, et al. The effect of image size on display performance: an assessment of variance components. Acad Radiol 2006; 13: 409-413
34. Straub WH, Gur D, Good WF, et al. Primary CT diagnosis of abdominal masses in a PACS environment. Radiology 1991; 178:739-743
35. Seltzer SE, Judy PF, Feldman U, Scarf L, Jacobson FL. Influence of CT image size and format on accuracy of lung nodule detection. Radiology 1998; 206:617-622