Indian Journal of Radiology Indian Journal of Radiology  

   Login   | Users online: 2501

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size     

 

 Table of Contents    
LETTER TO THE EDITOR  
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 24  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 201
Re:Utility of mobile devices in the computerized tomography evaluation of intracranial hemorrhage


Department of Radiology, Harran University School of Medicine, Sanliurfa, Turkey

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication12-Jun-2014
 

How to cite this article:
Yildiz S, Boyaci N, Dokumaci DS, Karakaş E. Re:Utility of mobile devices in the computerized tomography evaluation of intracranial hemorrhage. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2014;24:201

How to cite this URL:
Yildiz S, Boyaci N, Dokumaci DS, Karakaş E. Re:Utility of mobile devices in the computerized tomography evaluation of intracranial hemorrhage. Indian J Radiol Imaging [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Sep 20];24:201. Available from: http://www.ijri.org/text.asp?2014/24/2/201/134419
Dear Sir,

We have read with great interest the recent study of Panughpath, et al. revealing the utility of mobile devices to detect and assess intracranial hemorrhage on head computed tomography scan performed in the emergency setting. [1] Authors revealed a mobile device with appropriate web-based picture archiving and communication system is effective in the detection of intracranial hemorrhage present on head CT scan. In our opinion, some points about the study are not sufficiently clear.

In their study, authors compared the iPad review of head CT scans with the review on a two megapixel Dell UltraSharp™ 2007FP liquid crystal display (LCD) desktop monitor (Dell Inc.). The matrix size of this desktop monitor is not satisfactory for diagnostic imaging, and it has been suggested that the matrix size of monitors used for the interpretation of non-mammography medical images by the radiologists or where the primary treatment decision is made in the absence of an interpretative report such as in Emergency department must be at least three megapixel. [2] Besides, it was shown that the aspect ratio of diagnostic monitor was 4:3 at [Table 1] in the article of Panughpath, et al. [Table 1]. The American College of Radiology recommends the well-suited aspect ratio (width to height) of diagnostic monitors for the presentation of radiographic images is 3:4 or 4:5. [3]
Table 1: Of the study of panughpath et al


Click here to view


Secondly, the authors affirmed that the iPad reviews of head CT scans were made by two radiologists independently, and the studies were reviewed on the workstation by both radiologists after one week interval. They also reported that all discordant studies were further assessed by two senior fellowships trained in neuroradiology. Nevertheless, they did not state the inter-intra observer variability of this evaluation.

In discussion section, the authors revealed that minimum contrast ratio for display device for images of non-mammography scans should be more than 50:1. This contrast ratio is not adequate for diagnostic monitors, and not fitting with the American College of Radiology recommendations. [3] It has been suggested that the contrast ratio should be more than 600:1 for diagnostic monitors for radiologists, and more than 500:1 for medical staff and consultants (non-radiologists). [2]

We hope that above-mentioned comments will add to the value of the article by Panughpath et al.

 
   References Top

1.Panughpath SG, Kumar S, Kalyanpur A. Utility of mobile devices in the computerized tomography evaluation of intracranial hemorrhage. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2013;23:4-7.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
2.Available from: http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcss/documents/monitor-specifications.pdf [Last accessed on 2014 Jan 20].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.ACR technical standard for electronic practice of medical imaging. Available from: http://www.acr.org/secondarymainmenucategories/quality_safety/guidelines/med_phys/electronic_practice.aspx. [Last accessed on 2014 Jan 20].  Back to cited text no. 3
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Sema Yildiz
Department of Radiology, Harran University School of Medicine, Sanliurfa
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-3026.134419

Rights and Permissions



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
   Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1135    
    Printed25    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded100    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal