Mannino D M, Kennedy R D, Hodous T K
Division of Respiratory Disease Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV 26505.
Radiology. 1993 Jun;187(3):791-6. doi: 10.1148/radiology.187.3.8497632.
The classification of pneumoconiosis on 108 paired radiographs obtained in coal miners was compared by using conventional radiograph film images and digitized images of those conventional film images. Conventional film images and digitized images were each independently read in a random order in two separate sessions by three radiologists certified as "B" readers. Overall, the digitized images were perceived as being of better quality than the conventional film images (radiograph quality grade 1, 48% [617 of 1,292 classifications] vs 37% [482 of 1,296], respectively; P < .001). The mean International Labour Office (ILO) scores for small-opacity profusion were similar between the digitized images and conventional film images (3.14 vs 3.24, respectively; P = .19). The mean absolute differences in small-opacity profusion score between radiograph pairs were also similar (0.74 vs 0.77, respectively; P = .50). No difference in the ILO type of opacity was noted between the display modes. Interpretation of digitized images for pneumoconiotic small opacities was shown to be an acceptable alternative to interpretation of conventional film images; the important problem of reader variability affects both display modes.
通过使用传统X光胶片图像以及这些传统胶片图像的数字化图像,对108对煤矿工人的X光片进行尘肺病分类比较。三位具有“B”级阅片资质的放射科医生在两个独立的环节中,以随机顺序分别独立阅读传统胶片图像和数字化图像。总体而言,数字化图像的质量被认为优于传统胶片图像(放射图像质量等级1,分别为48%[1292次分类中的617次]和37%[1296次中的482次];P <.001)。数字化图像和传统胶片图像的小阴影密集度的平均国际劳工组织(ILO)评分相似(分别为3.14和3.24;P =.19)。X光片对之间小阴影密集度评分的平均绝对差异也相似(分别为0.74和下0.77;P =.50)。两种显示模式下的ILO阴影类型没有差异。结果表明,对尘肺病小阴影的数字化图像解读是传统胶片图像解读的可接受替代方法;阅片者变异性这一重要问题对两种显示模式均有影响。