A preliminary investigation of ambient light in the interventional fluoroscopy laboratory

Fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures require adequate image quality for medical decision making and eye-hand coordination. Other activities requiring light must be performed while the operator views the images. The lighting environment of a typical modern interventional cardiology laboratory was photographically documented during the performance of several interventional cardiology procedures. This laboratory was originally constructed in 1990, and reequipped several times. No one focused substantial attention on lighting design at any time. Key elements of the room design were simulated using a commercial 3-D rendering program. Matching photographs of the actual room with the simulation provides a semi-quantitative estimate of the properties of the real room and its equipment. The clinical images on the viewing monitors are overlaid by a substantial degree of diffuse reflections as well as a number of direct and indirect specular reflections from other light sources in the laboratory. Their intensity was greater on those monitors that incorporated a glass protective plate in front of the LCD displays. The effect of reflections on performance is quantitatively unknown. Extinguishing offending lights cannot be done without interfering with other critical aspects of the procedure. However, simple changes in room architecture and equipment should substantially reduce reflections.

[1]  P C Brennan,et al.  Assessment of monitor conditions for the display of radiological diagnostic images and ambient lighting. , 2004, The British journal of radiology.

[2]  M. Hellmich,et al.  Influence of room lighting on grey-scale perception with a CRT-and a TFT monitor display. , 2002, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[3]  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.

[4]  Stephen Balter,et al.  Radiographic Viewing Conditions , 1974, Other Conferences.

[5]  A Stargardt,et al.  [Effect of ambient lighting on the diagnostic efficiency of display screen workplaces]. , 1994, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[6]  Mathias Prokop,et al.  Detectability of catheters on bedside chest radiographs: comparison between liquid crystal display and high-resolution cathode-ray tube monitors. , 2005, Radiology.

[7]  K H Ng,et al.  In the eyes of the beholder: what we see is not what we get. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[8]  Takeo Ishigaki,et al.  Influence of Monitor Luminance Change on Observer Performance for Detection of Abnormalities Depicted on Chest Radiographs , 2003, Investigative radiology.

[9]  Peter Homolka,et al.  Impact of ambient light and window settings on the detectability of catheters on soft-copy display of chest radiographs at bedside. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  Elizabeth A. Krupinski,et al.  Evaluation of a flat CRT monitor for use in radiology , 2001, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[11]  Jerzy Kanicki,et al.  Angular dependence of the luminance and contrast in medical monochrome liquid crystal displays. , 2003, Medical physics.

[12]  Catherine Kim Ly,et al.  SoftCopy Display Quality Assurance Program at Texas Children's Hospital. , 2002, Journal of digital imaging.

[13]  R A Cederberg,et al.  Effect of different background lighting conditions on diagnostic performance of digital and film images. , 1998, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[14]  Jin Mo Goo,et al.  Effect of monitor luminance and ambient light on observer performance in soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs. , 2004, Radiology.

[15]  A R Cowen,et al.  Update on the recommended viewing protocol for FAXIL threshold contrast detail detectability test objects used in television fluoroscopy. , 1995, The British journal of radiology.

[16]  C Kimme-Smith,et al.  Effects of ambient light and view box luminance on the detection of calcifications in mammography. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  Qi Peng,et al.  Proposal of a Quality-Index or Metric for Soft Copy Display Systems: Contrast Sensitivity Study , 2003, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[18]  P C Brennan,et al.  Viewing conditions for diagnostic images in three major Dublin hospitals: a comparison with WHO and CEC recommendations. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.