Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Radiology, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, United States of America.
Clin Imaging. 2022 Aug;88:66-77. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2022.05.006. Epub 2022 May 21.
In response to COVID-19, our institution implemented three virtual readout systems: a commercial HIPAA compliant web-based video conferencing platform used for screen-sharing (Starleaf), an interactive control sharing system integrated into PACS allowing simultaneous multi-user mouse control over images (Collaborate), and the telephone. Our aim was to assess overall satisfaction with and perceived effectiveness of these virtual readout methods to optimize best practices for the future.
An IRB-exempt survey was electronically distributed to 64 trainees and 76 attendings at one tertiary-care institution via Survey Monkey. Questions focused on overall satisfaction, perceived effectiveness, technical difficulties, and continued future use of the three virtual readout strategies. Answers were collected with Likert scales, tick boxes, and open-ended questions.
32/64 trainees (50%) and 32/76 attendings (42%) completed the survey. Trainees and attendings were more satisfied with screen sharing (Starleaf) and perceived it more effective than control sharing (Collaborate) or the telephone (p < 0.0001). Respondents experienced more technical difficulties with control sharing versus screen sharing (p = 0.0004) with a negative correlation between level of technical difficulties and satisfaction with screen sharing (r = -0.50, p < 0.0001) and control sharing (r = -0.38, p = 0.0006). Trainees and faculty supported a combination of in-person and virtual readouts in the future (p < 0.0001).
Platforms mirroring in-person readouts, such as Starleaf, are preferred by both trainees and attendings over non-screen sharing platforms such as the telephone. However, technical stability determines satisfaction between similar platforms. Both trainees and attendings support incorporation of virtual readout methods in combination with traditional in-person readouts in the post-COVID-19 era.
为应对 COVID-19，我们机构实施了三种虚拟读片系统：一种是商用的符合 HIPAA 标准的基于网络的视频会议平台，用于屏幕共享（Starleaf）；一种是集成在 PACS 中的交互式控制共享系统，允许同时对图像进行多用户鼠标控制（Collaborate）；还有一种是电话。我们旨在评估这些虚拟读片方法的总体满意度和感知效果，以优化未来的最佳实践。
通过 Survey Monkey，我们向一家三级保健机构的 64 名住院医师和 76 名主治医生发送了一份经过 IRB 豁免的电子调查。问题集中在总体满意度、感知效果、技术困难以及对这三种虚拟读片策略的未来继续使用意愿上。答案采用李克特量表、勾选框和开放式问题收集。
32/64 名住院医师（50%）和 32/76 名主治医生（42%）完成了调查。住院医师和主治医生对屏幕共享（Starleaf）更满意，认为它比控制共享（Collaborate）或电话更有效（p<0.0001）。与屏幕共享相比，受访者在控制共享方面遇到更多的技术困难（p=0.0004），且技术困难程度与对屏幕共享（r=-0.50，p<0.0001）和控制共享（r=-0.38，p=0.0006）的满意度呈负相关。住院医师和教员支持未来采用面对面和虚拟读片相结合的方式（p<0.0001）。
与非屏幕共享平台（如电话）相比，模拟面对面读片的平台（如 Starleaf）更受住院医师和主治医生的青睐。然而，技术稳定性决定了类似平台之间的满意度。住院医师和主治医生都支持在 COVID-19 后时代将虚拟读片方法与传统的面对面读片方法结合使用。
