Elam E A, Rehm K, Hillman B J, Maloney K, Fajardo L L, McNeill K
Department of Radiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson 85724.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992 Mar;158(3):509-14. doi: 10.2214/ajr.158.3.1738985.
As part of our continuing evaluation of the clinical applicability of digital radiography, we compared the abilities of radiologists to detect pneumothoraces on conventional chest radiographs with their performances when using three formats of digitally obtained images. Twenty-three frontal-view chest radiographs with pneumothoraces and 22 other chest radiographs, either normal or showing miscellaneous abnormalities, were interpreted by five experienced radiologists in each of four formats: conventional film-screen chest radiographs, small-format (17.8 x 21.6 cm) computed radiographs, large-format (35.6 x 43.1 cm) computed radiographs, and digital images viewed on an interactive electronic workstation. The receiver-operating-characteristic curve areas for each observer for the four types of images were compared by a z test on a critical ratio, and the mean sensitivity and specificity values were compared by the sign rank test. The mean areas under the receiver-operating-characteristic curves ranged from 0.869 for the digital workstation to 0.915 for film-screen images. The differences observed among formats were not statistically significant. Mean specificities also were not significantly different, ranging from 0.90 for large-format computed radiographs to 0.96 for the digital workstation. Mean sensitivity ranged from 0.65 for the digital workstation to 0.82 for film-screen images. Radiologists interpreting digital workstation images were significantly less sensitive in detecting pneumothoraces than with film-screen and small-format computed images (p = .06). In this study, radiologists detected pneumothoraces equally well on conventional film-screen radiographs and digital images printed on film; however, they detected pneumothoraces less well on electronic viewing consoles. This latter finding reflects an important practical difference in the working behavior of radiologists interacting with a digital workstation.
作为我们对数字放射成像临床适用性持续评估的一部分,我们比较了放射科医生在传统胸部X光片上检测气胸的能力与他们使用三种数字获取图像格式时的表现。23张有气胸的正位胸部X光片和22张其他胸部X光片(正常或显示各种异常)由5名经验丰富的放射科医生以四种格式进行解读:传统的屏-片胸部X光片、小尺寸(17.8×21.6厘米)计算机X线摄影片、大尺寸(35.6×43.1厘米)计算机X线摄影片以及在交互式电子工作站上查看的数字图像。通过对临界比进行z检验比较了每位观察者对四种图像类型的受试者操作特征曲线面积,并通过符号秩检验比较了平均敏感度和特异度值。受试者操作特征曲线下的平均面积范围从数字工作站的0.869到屏-片图像的0.915。各格式之间观察到的差异无统计学意义。平均特异度也无显著差异,范围从大尺寸计算机X线摄影片的0.90到数字工作站的0.96。平均敏感度范围从数字工作站的0.65到屏-片图像的0.82。解读数字工作站图像的放射科医生在检测气胸方面的敏感度明显低于使用屏-片和小尺寸计算机图像时(p = 0.06)。在本研究中,放射科医生在传统屏-片X光片和打印在胶片上的数字图像上检测气胸的效果相同;然而,他们在电子查看控制台检测气胸的效果较差。后一发现反映了放射科医生与数字工作站交互时工作行为的一个重要实际差异。