Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report.

Digital imaging provides an effective means to electronically acquire, archive, distribute, and view medical images. Medical imaging display stations are an integral part of these operations. Therefore, it is vitally important to assure that electronic display devices do not compromise image quality and ultimately patient care. The AAPM Task Group 18 (TG18) recently published guidelines and acceptance criteria for acceptance testing and quality control of medical display devices. This paper is an executive summary of the TG18 report. TG18 guidelines include visual, quantitative, and advanced testing methodologies for primary and secondary class display devices. The characteristics, tested in conjunction with specially designed test patterns (i.e., TG18 patterns), include reflection, geometric distortion, luminance, the spatial and angular dependencies of luminance, resolution, noise, glare, chromaticity, and display artifacts. Geometric distortions are evaluated by linear measurements of the TG18-QC test pattern, which should render distortion coefficients less than 2%/5% for primary/secondary displays, respectively. Reflection measurements include specular and diffuse reflection coefficients from which the maximum allowable ambient lighting is determined such that contrast degradation due to display reflection remains below a 20% limit and the level of ambient luminance (Lamb) does not unduly compromise luminance ratio (LR) and contrast at low luminance levels. Luminance evaluation relies on visual assessment of low contrast features in the TG18-CT and TG18-MP test patterns, or quantitative measurements at 18 distinct luminance levels of the TG18-LN test patterns. The major acceptable criteria for primary/ secondary displays are maximum luminance of greater than 170/100 cd/m2, LR of greater than 250/100, and contrast conformance to that of the grayscale standard display function (GSDF) of better than 10%/20%, respectively. The angular response is tested to ascertain the viewing cone within which contrast conformance to the GSDF is better than 30%/60% and LR is greater than 175/70 for primary/secondary displays, or alternatively, within which the on-axis contrast thresholds of the TG18-CT test pattern remain discernible. The evaluation of luminance spatial uniformity at two distinct luminance levels across the display faceplate using TG18-UNL test patterns should yield nonuniformity coefficients smaller than 30%. The resolution evaluation includes the visual scoring of the CX test target in the TG18-QC or TG18-CX test patterns, which should yield scores greater than 4/6 for primary/secondary displays. Noise evaluation includes visual evaluation of the contrast threshold in the TG18-AFC test pattern, which should yield a minimum of 3/2 targets visible for primary/secondary displays. The guidelines also include methodologies for more quantitative resolution and noise measurements based on MTF and NPS analyses. The display glare test, based on the visibility of the low-contrast targets of the TG18-GV test pattern or the measurement of the glare ratio (GR), is expected to yield scores greater than 3/1 and GRs greater than 400/150 for primary/secondary displays. Chromaticity, measured across a display faceplate or between two display devices, is expected to render a u',v' color separation of less than 0.01 for primary displays. The report offers further descriptions of prior standardization efforts, current display technologies, testing prerequisites, streamlined procedures and timelines, and TG18 test patterns.

[1]  A Lie [Coordination of quality assurance]. , 1994, Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening : tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny raekke.

[2]  Peter G. J. Barten,et al.  Physical model for the contrast sensitivity of the human eye , 1992, Electronic Imaging.

[3]  G G Cox,et al.  Comparison of a cathode-ray-tube and film for display of computed radiographic images. , 1998, Medical physics.

[4]  Michael J. Flynn,et al.  Veiling glare point-spread function of medical imaging monitors , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[5]  Peter G. J. Barten,et al.  Contrast sensitivity of the human eye and its e ects on image quality , 1999 .

[6]  Sadayasu Ono,et al.  Contrast mapping and evaluation for electronic X-ray images on CRT display monitor , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[7]  B. Hemminger,et al.  Image presentation in digital radiology: perspectives on the emerging DICOM display function standard and its application. , 1997, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[8]  Jack D. Gaskill,et al.  Linear systems, fourier transforms, and optics , 1978, Wiley series in pure and applied optics.

[9]  Perry Sprawls,et al.  The Expanding role of medical physics in diagnostic imaging , 1997 .

[10]  Jerzy Kanicki,et al.  Monte Carlo analysis of the spectral photon emission and extraction efficiency of organic light-emitting devices , 2001 .

[11]  A Badano,et al.  Method for measuring veiling glare in high-performance display devices. , 2000, Applied optics.

[12]  Daniel B. Roitman,et al.  Failure modes in polymer-based light-emitting diodes , 1998 .

[13]  Robert G. Gould,et al.  Specification, acceptance testing and quality control of diagnostic x-ray imaging equipment , 1994 .

[14]  Stephen M. Pizer,et al.  Intensity mappings to linearize display devices , 1981 .

[15]  Peter A. Keller,et al.  Electronic Display Measurement: Concepts, Techniques, and Instrumentation , 1997 .

[16]  K. G. Lisk,et al.  Test pattern for video displays and hard-copy cameras. , 1985, Radiology.

[17]  Jerzy Kanicki,et al.  High performance organic polymer light-emitting heterostructure devices , 1999 .

[18]  Edward F. Kelley,et al.  A survey of the components of display-measurement standards , 1995 .

[19]  Hartwig R. Blume,et al.  Presentation of medical images on CRT displays: a renewed proposal for a display function standard , 1993, Medical Imaging.

[20]  Dev P. Chakraborty,et al.  Video display quality control measurements for picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[21]  Peter M. Steven,et al.  Practical aspects of grayscale calibration of display systems , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[22]  Peter G. J. Barten,et al.  Spatiotemporal model for the contrast sensitivity of the human eye and its temporal aspects , 1993, Electronic Imaging.

[23]  Charles E Willis,et al.  Implementing the DICOM Grayscale Standard Display Function for mixed hard- and soft-copy operations. , 2002, Journal of digital imaging.

[24]  William J. Dallas,et al.  Software for CRT image quality evaluation , 2000, Medical Imaging.

[25]  Bradley M. Hemminger,et al.  Perceptual linearization of video-display monitors for medical image presentation , 1994, Medical Imaging.

[26]  Thomas Mertelmeier,et al.  Impact of phosphor luminance noise on the specification of high-resolution CRT displays for medical imaging , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[27]  William J. Dallas,et al.  Signal-to-noise ratio and maximum information content of images displayed by a CRT , 1990, Medical Imaging.

[28]  A Badano,et al.  High-fidelity electronic display of digital radiographs. , 1999, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[29]  D A Bluemke,et al.  Interpretation of emergency department radiographs by radiologists and emergency medicine physicians: teleradiology workstation versus radiograph readings. , 1995, Radiology.

[30]  Charles L. Wilson,et al.  Modulation transfer function of a liquid crystal spatial light modulator , 1999 .

[31]  H Leclet [About the importance of building quality assurance programs in medical imaging]. , 1997, Journal de radiologie.

[32]  O. Linton,et al.  American College of Radiology , 2018, Definitions.

[33]  C.-M. Tang,et al.  Beam collimation from field-emitter arrays with linear planar lens , 1996, IEEE Conference Record - Abstracts. 1996 IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science.

[34]  Jerzy Kanicki,et al.  Accurate small-spot luminance measurements , 2002 .

[35]  Hilary Moss,et al.  Narrow Angle Electron Guns and Cathode Ray Tubes. , 1969 .

[36]  J B Ludlow,et al.  Performance of film, desktop monitor and laptop displays in caries detection. , 1999, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[37]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Method for in-field evaluation of the modulation transfer function of electronic display devices , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[38]  C. Flagle,et al.  Receiver operating characteristic analysis of fracture and pneumonia detection: comparison of laser-digitized workstation images and conventional analog radiographs. , 1993, Radiology.

[39]  P F Judy,et al.  Evaluation of video gray-scale display. , 1992, Medical physics.

[40]  Michael J. Flynn,et al.  System to maintain perceptually linear networked display devices , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[41]  F. R. Libsch,et al.  Understanding crosstalk in high-resolution color thin-film-transistor liquid crystal displays , 1998, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[42]  Edward F. Kelley,et al.  Accurate Contrast-Ratio Measurements Using a Cone Mask | NIST , 1997 .

[43]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Effect of viewing angle response on DICOM compliance of liquid crystal displays , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[44]  Steven L. Wright,et al.  Measurement and digital compensation of cross talk and photoleakage in high-resolution TFT LCDs , 1999, Electronic Imaging.

[45]  H Roehrig Image quality assurance for CRT display systems. , 1999, Journal of digital imaging.

[46]  Richard L. Van Metter,et al.  Visual CRT sharpness estimation using a fiducial marker set , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[47]  Richard L. Van Metter,et al.  Sensitivity of visual targets for display quality assessment , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[48]  D R Aberle,et al.  Performance characteristics and image fidelity of gray-scale monitors. , 1992, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[49]  Hans Roehrig,et al.  The Monochrome Cathode Ray Tube Display and Its Performance , 2000 .

[50]  Stewart James Briggs Soft Copy Display Of Electro-Optical Imagery , 1987, Photonics West - Lasers and Applications in Science and Engineering.

[51]  H Anrijs Digital imaging: the Agfa experience. , 1997, Journal belge de radiologie.

[52]  William Pavlicek,et al.  The Role of the Clinical Medical Physicist in Diagnostic Radiology , 1994 .

[53]  L. Arend,et al.  Contrast perception across changes in luminance and spatial frequency. , 1996, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[54]  Robert Stanton,et al.  Radiological Imaging: The Theory of Image Formation, Detection, and Processing , 1983 .

[55]  D Magid,et al.  Subtle orthopedic fractures: teleradiology workstation versus film interpretation. , 1993, Radiology.

[56]  T. Mulvey,et al.  Electron Optics , 1971, Nature.

[57]  C. Tang,et al.  Organic Electroluminescent Diodes , 1987 .

[58]  Hartwig R. Blume,et al.  Image-quality assessment of monochrome monitors for medical soft copy display , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[59]  Ibrahim Sezan,et al.  A System to Maintain Perceptually Linear Networked Display Devices , 1995 .

[60]  J. A. Hall Evaluation of Signal-Generating Image Tubes , 1971 .

[61]  J. Valin,et al.  Commission internationale de l''éclairage (CIE) , 1991, Instrumentation et méthodes de mesure.

[62]  C. B. Collins,et al.  Electron Field Emission From Amorphic Diamond Thin Films , 1993, [Proceedings] IVMC '93 Sixth International Vacuum Microelectronics Conference.

[63]  J. C. Dainty,et al.  Image Science: Principles, Analysis and Evaluation of Photographic-Type Imaging Processes , 1974 .

[64]  Paul Horowitz,et al.  The Art of Electronics , 1980 .

[65]  Hartwig R. Blume,et al.  Display of medical images on CRT soft-copy displays: a tutorial , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[66]  Jerzy Kanicki,et al.  High-efficiency organic polymer light-emitting heterostructure devices on flexible plastic substrates , 2000 .

[67]  C MichaelNier Standards for Electronic Imaging Technologies, Devices, and Systems , 1996 .

[68]  J P Felmlee,et al.  An evaluation of the signal and noise characteristics of four CCD-based film digitizers. , 1998, Medical physics.

[69]  Thomas Mertelmeier,et al.  Monitor simulations for the optimization of medical soft copies , 1996, Medical Imaging.

[70]  Edward Muka,et al.  Spatial frequency characteristics of cathode ray tubes (CRT) soft-copy displays , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[71]  Michael J. Flynn,et al.  Image degradation by glare in radiologic display devices , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[72]  William Pavlicek,et al.  Computed radiographic examinations of subtle bone pathology: implications for liquid crystal displays in radiology , 2001, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[73]  Edward F. Kelley,et al.  11.3: Sensitivity of Display Reflection Measurements to Apparatus Geometry , 2002 .

[74]  Hans Roehrig,et al.  Noise of CRT display systems , 1993, Medical Imaging.

[75]  Ryoji Yoshitake,et al.  Specular and diffuse reflection measurement feasibility study of ISO9241 Part 7 method , 1998 .

[76]  A. Rose,et al.  Vision: human and electronic , 1973 .

[77]  G N Rao Relevance of quality assurance. , 1994, Indian journal of ophthalmology.

[78]  N. Tirard-Gatel,et al.  Charging and reliability effects associated with FED spacers , 1999 .