...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>AJR: American Journal of Roentgenology : Including Diagnostic Radiology, Radiation Oncology, Nuclear Medicine, Ultrasonography and Related Basic Sciences >Novel, portable, cassette-sized, and wireless flat-panel digital radiography system: initial workflow results versus computed radiography.
【24h】

Novel, portable, cassette-sized, and wireless flat-panel digital radiography system: initial workflow results versus computed radiography.

机译：新型，便携式，盒式大小和无线平板数字X射线照相系统：初始工作流程结果与计算机射线照相之间的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to compare workflow efficiency between a conventional computed radiography (CR) system and a novel, portable, cassette-sized, and wireless flat-panel digital radiography (DR) system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational time-motion analyses were performed at one site at which CR and the new portable DR system are used concurrently. The workflow steps of both systems were identified and categorized to facilitate comparison. The times required for examination preparation, patient positioning, exposure, postacquisition processing, and the examination as a whole were recorded by a neutral observer. Timing differences between the CR and portable DR systems were compared, and all data were analyzed using commercially available statistical software. Nine general radiographic examination types were selected, with approximately 50 patients per examination type. RESULTS: A total of 941 examinations (CR, n = 474; portable DR, n = 467) were timed in this study. Total examination time differences between CR and portable DR system (mean, 26.44 seconds; median 26.99 seconds) were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.001), with DR proving faster than CR. The single largest contributor to the time difference between CR and portable DR was postacquisition processing (mean, 26.58 seconds; median, 25.91 seconds), which was a composite of multiple individual steps, including cassette transport (CR only, mean, 13.22 seconds; median, 12.74 seconds), cassette readout (mean, 10.15 seconds; median, 10.4 seconds), and postprocessing (mean, 3.21 seconds; median, 3.11 seconds). CONCLUSION: Overall radiographer time was significantly shorter when performing examination-related tasks with the novel, portable DR system than when performing comparable tasks with the CR system, a difference that appears to result largely from technology configuration.
机译：目的：本文的目的是比较传统的计算机放射成像（CR）系统和新型，便携式，盒式尺寸和无线平板数字放射成像（DR）系统之间的工作流程效率。材料与方法：在一个同时使用CR和新型便携式DR系统的站点上进行了观察性时动分析。确定并分类了两个系统的工作流程步骤，以方便比较。中立的观察者记录了检查准备，患者放置，暴露，采集后处理以及整个检查所需的时间。比较了CR和便携式DR系统之间的时间差异，并使用市售统计软件分析了所有数据。选择了9种一般的X光检查类型，每种检查类型大约有50名患者。结果：这项研究总共进行了941次检查（CR，n = 474;便携式DR，n = 467）。发现CR和便携式DR系统之间的总检查时间差异（平均值为26.44秒;中位数为26.99秒）具有统计学显着性（p <0.001），其中DR被证明比CR更快。 CR和便携式DR之间时间差的最大贡献者是采集后处理（平均26.58秒;中位数25.91秒），这是多个单独步骤的综合结果，包括磁带传送（仅CR，平均13.22秒;中位数） ，12.74秒），录像带读数（平均10.15秒;中位数10.4秒）和后处理（平均3.21秒;中位数3.11秒）。结论：与新颖的便携式DR系统一起执行与检查相关的任务时，与与CR系统执行类似任务时相比，射线照相师的总时间明显缩短，这在很大程度上似乎是由于技术配置所致。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号