Ultrasound image quality assessment: a framework for evaluation of clinical image quality

Improvement of ultrasound images should be guided by their diagnostic value. Evaluation of clinical image quality is generally performed subjectively, because objective criteria have not yet been fully developed and accepted for the evaluation of clinical image quality. Based on recommendation 500 from the International Telecommunication Union - Radiocommunication (ITU-R) for such subjective quality assessment, this work presents equipment and a methodology for clinical image quality evaluation for guiding the development of new and improved imaging. The system is based on a BK-Medical 2202 ProFocus scanner equipped with a UA2227 research interface, connected to a PC through X64-CL Express camera link. Data acquisition features subject data recording, loading/saving of exact scanner settings (for later experiment reproducibility), free access to all system parameters for beamformation and is applicable for clinical use. The free access to all system parameters enables the ability to capture standardized images as found in the clinic and experimental data from new processing or beamformation methods. The length of the data sequences is only restricted by the memory of the external PC. Data may be captured interleaved, switching between multiple setups, to maintain identical transducer, scanner, region of interest and recording time on both the experimental- and standardized images. Data storage is approximately 15.1 seconds pr. 3 sec sequence including complete scanner settings and patient information, which is fast enough to get sufficient number of scans under realistic operating conditions, so that statistical evaluation is valid and reliable.

[1]  J. Arendt Paper presented at the 10th Nordic-Baltic Conference on Biomedical Imaging: Field: A Program for Simulating Ultrasound Systems , 1996 .

[2]  M J Tapiovaara,et al.  Review of relationships between physical measurements and user evaluation of image quality. , 2008, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[3]  Quan Chen,et al.  The ultrasonix 500RP: A commercial ultrasound research interface , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[4]  Sugato Chakravarty,et al.  Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures , 1995 .

[5]  Helmut Ermert,et al.  An ultrasound research interface for a clinical system. , 2006, IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control.

[6]  Jørgen Arendt Jensen,et al.  Experimental ultrasound system for real-time synthetic imaging , 1999, 1999 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium. Proceedings. International Symposium (Cat. No.99CH37027).

[7]  Kim L Gammelmark,et al.  In-vivo evaluation of convex array synthetic aperture imaging. , 2007, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[8]  K. Boone,et al.  Effect of skin impedance on image quality and variability in electrical impedance tomography: a model study , 1996, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.