Human-computer interaction in radiotherapy target volume delineation: A prospective, multi-institutional comparison of user input devices

Journal of Digital Imaging

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 794-803

  Rasch, Coen R N ^a   Duppen, Joop C ^a   Steenbakkers, Roel J ^a   Baseman, Daniel ^a   Eng, Tony Y ^a   Fuller, Clifton D ^a   Harris, Anna M ^a   Jones III, William E ^a   Li, Ying ^a   Maani, Elizabeth ^a   Nguyen, Dominic D ^a   Swanson, Gregory P ^a   Bicquart, Celine ^a,b   Gagnon, Patrick ^a,b   Holland, John ^a,b   McDonald, Tasha ^a,b   Thomas Jr , Charles R ^a,b   Wang, Samuel J ^a,b   Fuss, Martin ^a,b   Sharp, Hadley J ^a,c   Ludwig, Michelle ^a,c   Rosenthal, David I ^a,c   Diaz, Aidnag Z ^a,d   Demandante, Carlo G N ^a,e   Shapiro, Ronald ^a,f   more..

^a Mays Cancer Center at UT Health San Antonio   (United States)

^b OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^d RUSH MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^e WILFORD HALL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^f INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Human computer interaction; Imaging informatics; Observer performance; Observer variation; Radiation oncology; Radiotherapy; User interface; User computer interface; Workflow; Workflow reengineering

Indexed keywords

IMAGING INFORMATICS; OBSERVER PERFORMANCE; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIATION ONCOLOGY; WORKFLOW;

JOB ANALYSIS; KNOBS; MAMMALS; ONCOLOGY; RADIOTHERAPY; TYPEWRITER KEYBOARDS; USER INTERFACES; VOLUMETRIC ANALYSIS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER; COMPUTER ASSISTED THERAPY; HUMAN; MULTICENTER STUDY; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORGAN SIZE; RADIOTHERAPY;

COMPUTERS; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORGAN SIZE; RADIOTHERAPY; THERAPY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 84855593879     PISSN: 08971889     EISSN: 1618727X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10278-010-9341-2     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Rasch C, Steenbakkers R, van Herk M: Target definition in prostate, head, and neck. Semin Radiat Oncol 15:136-145, 2005 (Pubitemid 40835955)
2. Kotani K, Horii K: An analysis of muscular load and performance in using a pen-tablet system. J Physiol Anthropol Appl Hum Sci 22:89-95, 2003 (Pubitemid 39178992)
3. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A: G Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Meth 39:175-191, 2007
4. Feustal E, Davisson L: The asymptotic relative efficiency of mixed statistical tests. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 13:247-255, 1967
5. Rosset A, Spadola L, Ratib O: OsiriX: an open-source software for navigating in multidimensional DICOM images. J Digit Imaging 17:205-216, 2004 (Pubitemid 40378992)
6. Duppen JC, Steenbakkers RJHM, Fitton I, et al: Delineation software for teaching in target volume definition. Radiother Oncol 73:S437-S438, 2004
7. Steenbakkers R, Duppen J, Fitton I, et al: Observer variation in target volume delineation of lung cancer related to radiation oncologist-computer interaction: a 'Big Brother' evaluation. Radiother Oncol 77:182-190, 2005 (Pubitemid 41682385)
8. Steenbakkers RJ, Duppen JC, Fitton I, et al: Reduction of observer variation using matched CT-PET for lung cancer delineation: a three-dimensional analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64:435-448, 2006 (Pubitemid 43083430)
9. van't Riet A, Mak AC, Moerland MA, Elders LH, van der Zee W: A conformation number to quantify the degree of conformality in brachytherapy and external beam irradiation: application to the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 37:731-736, 1997 (Pubitemid 27175329)
10. Feuvret L, Noel G, Mazeron JJ, Bey P: Conformity index: a review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64:333-342, 2006 (Pubitemid 43083417)
11. Leunens G, Menten J, Weltens C, Verstraete J, van der Schueren E: Quality assessment of medical decision making in radiation oncology: variability in target volume delineation for brain tumours. Radiother Oncol 29:169-175, 1993 (Pubitemid 24007855)
12. Jeanneret-Sozzi W, Moeckli R, Valley JF, Zouhair A, Ozsahin EM, Mirimanoff RO: The reasons for discrepancies in target volume delineation: a SASRO study on head-and-neck and prostate cancers. Strahlenther Onkol 182:450-457, 2006 (Pubitemid 44214488)
13. Jansen EP, Nijkamp J, Gubanski M, Lind PA, Verheij M: Interobserver variation of clinical target volume delineation in gastric cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 77:1166-1170, 2010
14. Guckenberger M, Pohl F, Baier K, et al: Influence of rectum delineation (rectal volume vs. rectal wall) on IMRT treatment planning of the prostate. Strahlenther Onkol 182:721-726, 2006 (Pubitemid 44887174)
15. Gregoire V, Levendag P, Ang KK, et al: CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC, RTOG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol 69:227-236, 2003 (Pubitemid 37485996)
16. Weiss E, Hess CF: The impact of gross tumor volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) definition on the total accuracy in radiotherapy theoretical aspects and practical experiences. Strahlenther Onkol 179:21-30, 2003 (Pubitemid 36114332)
17. Rasch C, Barillot I, Remeijer P, Touw A, van Herk M, Lebesque JV: Definition of the prostate in CT and MRI: a multi-observer study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 43:57-66, 1999 (Pubitemid 29065832)
18. Muijs CT, Schreurs LM, Busz DM, et al: Consequences of additional use of PET information for target volume delineation and radiotherapy dose distribution for esophageal cancer. Radiother Oncol 93:447-453, 2009
19. Guido A, Fuccio L, Rombi B, et al: Combined 18 F-FDG-PET/CT imaging in radiotherapy target delineation for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 73:759-763, 2009
20. Ford EC, Lavely WC, Frassica DA, et al: Comparison of FDGPET/ CT and CT for delineation of lumpectomy cavity for partial breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71:595-602, 2008
21. Faria SL, Menard S, Devic S, et al: Impact of FDG-PET/CT on radiotherapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer and correlation of imaging stage with pathologic findings. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70:1035-1038, 2008 (Pubitemid 351296113)
22. Bassi MC, Turri L, Sacchetti G, et al: FDG-PET/CT imaging for staging and target volume delineation in preoperative conformal radiotherapy of rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70:1423-1426, 2008 (Pubitemid 351417756)
23. Bekelman JE, Wolden S, Lee N: Head-and-neck target delineation among radiation oncology residents after a teaching intervention: a prospective, blinded pilot study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 73:416-423, 2009
24. Tai P, Van Dyk J, Yu E, Battista J, Stitt L, Coad T: Variability of target volume delineation in cervical esophageal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 42:277-288, 1998 (Pubitemid 28502773)
25. Castro Pena P, Kirova YM, Campana F, et al: Anatomical, clinical and radiological delineation of target volumes in breast cancer radiotherapy planning: individual variability, questions and answers. Br J Radiol 82:595-599, 2009
26. Fuller CD, Nijkamp J, Duppen J, et al: Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010 (in press)
27. Szumacher E, Harnett N, Warner S, et al: Effectiveness of educational intervention on the congruence of prostate and rectal contouring as compared with a gold standard in three-dimensional radiotherapy for prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76:379- 385, 2010
28. Dalah EZ, Nisbet A, Bradley D: Effect of window level on target volume delineation in treatment planning. Appl Radiat Isotopes 68:602-604, 2010
29. Han X, Hoogeman MS, Levendag PC, et al: Atlas-based autosegmentation of head and neck CT images. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 11:434-441, 2008
30. Sims R, Isambert A, Gregoire V, et al: A pre-clinical assessment of an atlas-based automatic segmentation tool for the head and neck. Radiother Oncol 93:474-478, 2009
31. Reiner B, Siegel E: The potential for gaming techniques in radiology education and practice. J Am Coll Radiol 5:110-114, 2008 (Pubitemid 351181404)
32. Ratib O, Valentino DJ, McCoy MJ, Balbona JA, Amato CL, Boots K: Computer-aided design and modeling of workstations and radiology reading rooms for the new millennium. Radiographics 20:1807-1816, 2000
33. Ng I, Hwang PY, Kumar D, Lee CK, Kockro RA, Sitoh YY: Surgical planning for microsurgical excision of cerebral arteriovenous malformations using virtual reality technology. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 151:453-463, 2009. discussion 463
34. Krupinski EA, Berbaum KS: The Medical Image Perception Society update on key issues for image perception research. Radiology 253:230-233, 2009
35. Krupinski EA, Williams MB, Andriole K, et al: Digital radiography image quality: image processing and display. J Am Coll Radiol 4:389-400, 2007 (Pubitemid 46819179)
36. Krupinski EA, Roehrig H, Dallas W, Fan J: Differential use of image enhancement techniques by experienced and inexperienced observers. J Digit Imaging 18:311-315, 2005 (Pubitemid 41609329)
37. Manning DJ, Gale A, Krupinski EA: Perception research in medical imaging. Br J Radiol 78:683-685, 2005 (Pubitemid 41122679)
38. Maes RM: Concerns: choosing a radiology workstation. Radiology 246:335-336, 2008. author reply 335-336
39. Krupinski EA, Kallergi M: Choosing a radiology workstation: technical and clinical considerations. Radiology 242:671-682, 2007
40. Moise A, Atkins MS, Rohling R: Evaluating different radiology workstation interaction techniques with radiologists and laypersons. J Digit Imaging 18:116-130, 2005 (Pubitemid 40616925)
41. Sherbondy AJ, Holmlund 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, 2005 (Pubitemid 40139907)
42. Weiss DL, Siddiqui KM, Scopelliti J: Radiologist assessment of PACS user interface devices. J Am Coll Radiol 3:265-273, 2006
43. Jang SH, Kim WY: Defining a new annotation object for DICOM image: a practical approach. Comput Med Imaging Graph 28:371-375, 2004
44. Dowsett RJ, Galvin JM, Cheng E, et al: Contouring structures for 3-dimensional treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 22:1083-1088, 1992
45. Larsson SN, Stapleton S, Larsson L: A comparison of speed and accuracy of contouring using mouse versus graphics tablet. Clin Oncol 19:S36-S36, 2007
46. Anderlind E, Noz ME, Sallnas EL, Lind BK, Maguire Jr, GQ: Will haptic feedback speed up medical imaging? An application to radiation treatment planning. Acta Oncol 47:32-37, 2008
47. Das IJ, Moskvin V, Johnstone PA: Analysis of treatment planning time among systems and planners for intensity-modulated radiation therapy. J Am Coll Radiol 6:514-517, 2009
48. Wilson LD, Flynn DF, Haffty BG: Radiation oncology career decision variables for graduating trainees seeking positions in 2003-2004. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:519-525, 2005 (Pubitemid 40704471)