AimsTo establish whether lower resolution, lower cost viewing devices have the potential to deliver mammographic interpretation training.MethodsOn three occasions over eight months, fourteen consultant radiologists and reporting radiographers read forty challenging digital mammography screening cases on three different displays: a digital mammography workstation, a standard LCD monitor, and a smartphone. Standard image manipulation software was available for use on all three devices. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) were used to determine the significance of differences in performance between the viewing devices with/without the application of image manipulation software. The effect of reader’s experience was also assessed.ResultsPerformance was significantly higher (p < .05) on the mammography workstation compared to the other two viewing devices. When image manipulation software was applied to images viewed on the standard LCD monitor, performance improved to mirror levels seen on the mammography workstation with no significant difference between the two. Image interpretation on the smartphone was uniformly poor. Film reader experience had no significant effect on performance across all three viewing devices.ConclusionLower resolution standard LCD monitors combined with appropriate image manipulation software are capable of displaying mammographic pathology, and are potentially suitable for delivering mammographic interpretation training.Key points• This study investigates potential devices for training in mammography interpretation.• Lower resolution standard LCD monitors are potentially suitable for mammographic interpretation training.• The effect of image manipulation tools on mammography workstation viewing is insignificant.• Reader experience had no significant effect on performance in all viewing devices.• Smart phones are not suitable for displaying mammograms.
[1]
Asim F. Choudhri,et al.
Initial Experience with a Handheld Device Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine Viewer: OsiriX Mobile on the iPhone
,
2010,
Journal of Digital Imaging.
[2]
Mark Simpson,et al.
iPhone-Based Teleradiology for the Diagnosis of Acute Cervico-Dorsal Spine Trauma
,
2010,
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques.
[3]
Michael M. Maher,et al.
Emergency CT brain: preliminary interpretation with a tablet device: image quality and diagnostic performance of the Apple iPad
,
2012,
Emergency Radiology.
[4]
Bhargav Raman,et al.
Radiology on handheld devices: image display, manipulation, and PACS integration issues.
,
2004,
Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.
[5]
James R. Stone,et al.
Handheld Device Review of Abdominal CT for the Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis
,
2012,
Journal of Digital Imaging.
[6]
Yan Chen,et al.
Mammographic interpretation training in the UK: current difficulties and future outlook
,
2009,
Medical Imaging.
[7]
Dev P Chakraborty,et al.
Observer studies involving detection and localization: modeling, analysis, and validation.
,
2004,
Medical physics.
[8]
Hiroshi Honda,et al.
Diagnostic performance in differentiation of breast lesion on digital mammograms: comparison among hard-copy film, 3-megapixel LCD monitor, and 5-megapixel LCD monitor.
,
2011,
Clinical imaging.
[9]
Mark F McEntee,et al.
Diagnostic efficacy of handheld devices for emergency radiologic consultation.
,
2010,
AJR. American journal of roentgenology.