Selenium-based digital radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography of the hands and feet: A subjective comparison

被引:26
|
作者
Piraino, DW [1 ]
Davros, WJ [1 ]
Lieber, M [1 ]
Richmond, BJ [1 ]
Schils, JP [1 ]
Recht, MP [1 ]
Grooff, PN [1 ]
Belhobek, GH [1 ]
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Radiol, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
D O I
10.2214/ajr.172.1.9888764
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to subjectively compare the visibility of normal anatomy of the hands and feet using selenium-based digital radiography versus conventional film-screen (100-speed) radiography. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Digital and film-screen images of the hands and feet of 24 patients were obtained without an antiscatter grid using identical X-ray exposure. Each pair of images was evaluated independently by five experienced radiologists for visibility of normal anatomy using a six-point rating scale. Soft tissues, cortical bone, and trabeculae were evaluated. For each observer, "equivalence" was defined as a mean difference in image quality of less than 1 unit on the 0-5 scale used in the study. Paired t tests were also performed to determine whether the average visibility rating of one technique was statistically superior to that of the other at a .05 level of significance for each observer and at each anatomic landmark. RESULTS. In all categories, selenium-based digital images were rated equivalent to film-screen images by the five observers. Using the sum of the nine landmarks, four of the ve observers rated the quality of selenium-based digital images superior to that of film-screen images. CONCLUSION. Subjective visibility of normal anatomy of the hands and feet using selenium-based digital radiography was similar to that achieved using conventional film-screen radiography.
引用
收藏
页码:177 / 184
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] COMPARISON OF FLAT-PANEL DIGITAL TO CONVENTIONAL FILM-SCREEN RADIOGRAPHY IN DETECTION OF EXPERIMENTALLY CREATED LESIONS OF THE EQUINE THIRD METACARPAL BONE
    Moorman, Valerie J.
    Marshall, John F.
    Devine, Dustin V.
    Payton, Mark
    Jann, Henry W.
    Bahr, Robert
    VETERINARY RADIOLOGY & ULTRASOUND, 2009, 50 (06) : 577 - 583
  • [42] Comparison of Direct Digital Mammography, Computed Radiography, and Film-Screen in the French National Breast Cancer Screening Program
    Seradour, Brigitte
    Heid, Patrice
    Esteve, Jacques
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2014, 202 (01) : 229 - 236
  • [43] CONVENTIONAL FILM-SCREEN VERSUS COMPUTED STORAGE PHOSPHOR RADIOGRAPHY - SIMULATED MILIARY LUNG-DISEASE IN AN ANTHROPOMORPHIC PHANTOM
    MOSSER, H
    PARTAN, G
    URBAN, M
    KRAMPLA, W
    OTTES, F
    HRUBY, W
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1995, 30 (03) : 186 - 191
  • [44] Comparison of normal anatomic structures using digital radiography (DR) vs conventional film screen
    Sabloff, BS
    Munden, RF
    Gladish, GW
    Truong, MT
    Erasmus, JJ
    Madewell, JE
    RADIOLOGY, 2001, 221 : 354 - 354
  • [45] New full field clinical digital projection radiography system: Image evaluation and statistical comparison to film-screen images
    Shaber, GS
    Maidment, AD
    RADIOLOGY, 1998, 206 (02) : 574 - 574
  • [46] Routine application of selenium-based digital chest radiography: Experience after 4 years
    Henschel, MF
    Schwermer, B
    Nicolas, V
    RADIOLOGY, 1996, 201 : 1469 - 1469
  • [47] A comparison of film-screen, computed and direct radiography: A community hospital time-motion study
    Mehta, M
    Lee, T
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2004, 182 (04) : 25 - 25
  • [48] Detection of CT-proved pulmonary nodules: Comparison of selenium-based digital and conventional screen-film chest radiographs
    Woodard, PK
    Slone, RM
    Sagel, SS
    Fleishman, MJ
    Gutierrez, FR
    Reiker, GG
    Pilgram, TK
    Jost, RG
    RADIOLOGY, 1998, 209 (03) : 705 - 709
  • [49] Comparison of subjective and objective evaluation of screen-film systems for chest radiography
    Moeckli, R
    Verdun, FR
    Bochud, FO
    Valley, JF
    Hessler, C
    Schnyder, P
    RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 1998, 80 (1-3) : 265 - 268
  • [50] Comparison of digital radiography, conventional film, and self-developing film.
    Eikenberg, SL
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2000, 79 : 376 - 376