Viewing your digital radiographs: which monitor is best?

McIlgorm, D J

doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.293

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…dental radiographs, unlike normal MDs that are configured on the basis of medical radiology images. [13][14][15] However, it is questionable whether specifically configured "dental" settings on an MD are actually beneficial in such tasks as detection of radioanatomic structures and diagnosis of disease. There is lack of scientific evidence to support the notion that use of these monitors improves efficacy in observing radioanatomic features compared with general purpose standard screens (SS).…”

Section: Statement Of Clinical Relevancementioning

confidence: 99%

Observer preference for a dedicated medical display vs a standard screen in the detection of dental radioanatomic features

Shujaat

Letelier

Grauwe

et al. 2020

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. The aim of this study was to assess observers' preference for a dentomaxillofacial dedicated medical display (MD) vs a general-purpose standard screen (SS) for in vitro and in vivo observation of normal radioanatomic features. Study Design. The in vitro sample consisted of 2-dimensional (2-D) intraoral (n = 15), panoramic (n = 2), cephalometric (n = 2), and 3-dimensional (3-D) cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (n = 9) data sets, acquired by utilizing commercially available skull and head-and-neck phantoms. The in vivo sample consisted of 80 radiographs (intraoral = 20; panoramic = 20; cephalometric = 20; and CBCT = 20). In vitro and in vivo data sets were both acquired by using Minray, Promax2-D, and Vistapano Ceph for 2-D images and Accuitomo, NewTom VGi evo, and Promax3-D for CBCT images. Five observers entered screen preferences when evaluating the appearance of radioanatomic structures on MD and SS. Results. Both in vitro and in vivo assessments showed good interobserver and excellent intraobserver agreement. In vitro data suggested a significant preference for MD over SS for viewing radioanatomic features on panoramic and CBCT images, whereas MD was significantly preferred for in vivo images of all imaging modalities (P < .001). Conclusions. Overall, observers preferred MD over SS for both in vitro and in vivo observation of normal radioanatomic features irrespective of the imaging modality.

show abstract

Section: Statement Of Clinical Relevancementioning

confidence: 99%

Observer preference for a dedicated medical display vs a standard screen in the detection of dental radioanatomic features

Shujaat

Letelier

Grauwe

et al. 2020

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To capture the market, dentally configured medical-grade monitors are available that have been engineered to the resolution and grey scale of dental radiographs. 15 16 17 However, conflict is evident throughout the literature regarding their benefit for radiographic diagnostics over off-the-shelf monitors. 2 4 5 6 9 15 16 18 19 20 21 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of viewing conditions on the performance assessment of different computer monitors used for dental diagnostics

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aimed to assess the computer monitors used for analysis and interpretation of digital radiographs within the clinics of the Oral Health Centre of Western Australia. Materials and Methods In total, 135 computer monitors (3 brands, 6 models) were assessed by analysing the same radiographic image of a combined 13-step aluminium step wedge and the Artinis CDDent 1.0® (Artinis Medical Systems B.V.®, Elst, the Netherlands) test object. The number of steps and cylindrical objects observed on each monitor was recorded along with the monitor's make, model, position relative to the researcher's eye level, and proximity to the nearest window. The number of window panels blocked by blinds, the outside weather conditions, and the number of ceiling lights over the surgical suite/cubicle were also recorded. MedCalc® version 19.2.1 (MedCalc Software Ltd®, Ostend, Belgium, https://www.medcalc.org ; 2020) was used for statistical analyses (Kruskal-Wallis test and stepwise regression analysis). The level of significance was set at P <0.05. Results Stepwise regression analysis showed that only the monitor brand and proximity of the monitor to a window had a significant impact on the monitor's performance ( P <0.05). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences ( P <0.05) in monitor performance for all variables investigated, except for the weather and the clinic in which the monitors were placed. Conclusion The vast performance variation present between computer monitors implies the need for a review of monitor selection, calibration, and viewing conditions.

show abstract

“…Image quality can be checked qualitatively and quantitatively by using the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers test pattern (SMPTE) (Figure 1). 2 To establish baseline standards, the radiology department initiated a quality control programme using the SMPTE technique to ensure the optimal and consistent display of images on computer monitors within the dental institute. This reference tool (SMPTE) was uploaded onto the radiography system to allow ease of assessment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Audit of diagnostic quality of computer monitors used to view digital radiographs

2021

Int J Paed Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Viewing your digital radiographs: which monitor is best?

Cited by 6 publications

References 9 publications

Observer preference for a dedicated medical display vs a standard screen in the detection of dental radioanatomic features

Observer preference for a dedicated medical display vs a standard screen in the detection of dental radioanatomic features

Impact of viewing conditions on the performance assessment of different computer monitors used for dental diagnostics

Audit of diagnostic quality of computer monitors used to view digital radiographs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About