Nuisance levels of noise effects radiologists' performance

This study aimed to measure the sound levels in Irish x-ray departments. The study then established whether these levels of noise have an impact on radiologists performance Noise levels were recorded 10 times within each of 14 environments in 4 hospitals, 11 of which were locations where radiologic images are judged. Thirty chest images were then presented to 26 senior radiologists, who were asked to detect up to three nodular lesions within 30 posteroanterior chest x-ray images in the absence and presence of noise at amplitude demonstrated in the clinical environment. The results demonstrated that noise amplitudes rarely exceeded that encountered with normal conversation with the maximum mean value for an image-viewing environment being 56.1 dB. This level of noise had no impact on the ability of radiologists to identify chest lesions with figure of merits of 0.68, 0.69, and 0.68 with noise and 0.65, 0.68, and 0.67 without noise for chest radiologists, non-chest radiologists, and all radiologists, respectively. the difference in their performance using the DBM MRMC method was significantly better with noise than in the absence of noise at the 90% confidence interval (p=0.077). Further studies are required to establish whether other aspects of diagnosis are impaired such as recall and attention and the effects of more unexpected noise on performance.

[1]  L Clarke Cox,et al.  Output Levels of Commercially Available Portable Compact Disc Players and the Potential Risk to Hearing , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[2]  Nancy A Obuchowski,et al.  A comparison of the Dorfman–Berbaum–Metz and Obuchowski–Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  Stephen L Hillis,et al.  Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. , 2008, Academic radiology.

[4]  K. Berbaum,et al.  Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis. Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. , 1992, Investigative radiology.

[5]  K Honda,et al.  Influence of noise on heart rate and quantity of work in mental work. , 1992, The Annals of physiological anthropology = Seiri Jinruigaku Kenkyukai kaishi.

[6]  Cyril M. Harris,et al.  Handbook of Noise Control , 1957 .

[7]  Bruce A. Berger,et al.  Relationships between Ambient Sounds and the Accuracy of Pharmacists' Prescription-Filling Performance , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[8]  Stephen L Hillis,et al.  Monte Carlo validation of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method using normalized pseudovalues and less data-based model simplification. , 2005, Academic radiology.

[9]  P. Thirumalaikolundusubramanian,et al.  Hearing loss in a textile factory. , 2000, Saudi Medical Journal.

[10]  Brenda Gillespie,et al.  Acute Effects of Noise on Blood Pressure and Heart Rate , 2004, Archives of environmental health.

[11]  S. Hillis A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom methods for multiple observer ROC analysis , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  S P Banbury,et al.  Office noise and employee concentration: Identifying causes of disruption and potential improvements , 2005, Ergonomics.

[13]  P Paul F M Kuijer,et al.  The effect of office concepts on worker health and performance: a systematic review of the literature , 2005, Ergonomics.

[14]  Stephen L Hillis,et al.  Power estimation for the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. , 2004, Academic radiology.

[15]  K S Berbaum,et al.  Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: factorial experimental design. , 1998, Academic radiology.