#digital radiology

[aishavass]

The impressive growth of VNA and PACS Market is attributed to rampant growth in IT-healthcare segment and increasing public health awareness resulting in...

[sandeep-health-care]

Digital Radiography

The introduction of a flat panel system in a filmless computerised radiology unit allows the productivity of a radiology department to be noticeably increased, while providing ergonomic comfort and ease of use. It is particularly suitable for the field of paediatric radiology.

There are numerous factors that drive a radiology department to adopt digital imaging technology. The use of the Picture Archiving and Communications System (PACS) and hospital managements' need to optimise operating costs for higher efficiency are only two examples.

With these factors and the impending obsolescence of the existing conventional radiography system in some regions, the radiology department (University Hospital of Nancy, France) decided on a fully automated digital flat detector radiography system. Reasons for this decision were the preference for a Flat Detector (FD) system that delivers a high level of automated system movements. Numerous independent studies have proved that flat detector imaging systems improve productivity and deliver significant dose-saving advantages.

Comparing FD and CR systems

This study was performed in a paediatric radiology department of a university hospital with an annual patient throughput of 30,000 for general radiography. 40% of these imaging examinations are emergency cases with the patient throughput remaining at a stable level in recent years. There are two general radiography rooms. The digital flat detector radiography system is installed in one of them while the other room has a conventional radiography unit with a Computerised Radiography (CR) imaging system. The study focussed on the comparative evaluation of the FD system and the CR system with regard to three key indicators: patient throughput, changes of workload within the rooms and user satisfaction.

The equipment that allowed the radioluminescent plate system to be tested is the Siemens (with a free-floating table and of variable height) installation (ceiling-suspended installation), connected to a PCR AC 3000 Philips RLMS system.

The tested DR system is an Axiom Aristos FX Siemens installation (Erlangen – Germany) with a flat panel (Trixell, Moirans – France), large screen (43 cm x 43 cm), with a matrix of 3000 pixels x 3000 pixels. Movements of the panel and the X-ray tube are completely automatic. The computer interface is provided by means of a syngo platform running on Microsoft Windows.

Methods and evaluation

The first part of the study focussed on the comparative evaluation of overall patient throughput. A total of 193 patients were evaluated during the study, with 94 patients examined on the conventional/CR system and 99 patients examined on the FD system. Of these 193 patients, five categories of examinations were evaluated; chest, abdomen, pelvis as well as upper and lower extremities. The examinations were further divided into those with a single exposure and those with two exposures (where frontal and lateral projections are standard). Throughput and average examination time of these procedures were also measured. Additionally, each examination was broken into three phases to analyse where the most benefits were experienced. The three phases were:

Positioning phase: Patient positioning and placement of detector or CR cassette for each respective system.

Execution phase: Execution of the imaging process including exposure, access to patient data, CR cassette processing and visualisation of image for FD system.

Acquisition phase: Consisting of archiving via PACS for the two radiographic systems.

The comparison of the different times for each step of the execution of the action, then by anatomic area explored was done by comparison to averages, using the t test and the Mann-Whitney nonparametric test (SPSS 11.0 software).

The second focus of the study assessed the workload distribution of patients to the two different radiographic rooms over the one year study period. Activity curves were created to allow a time comparison of results and an evaluation of stability over the long-term.

Changes in organisation and division of duties among technicians occasionally involved in the installation of the DR were likewise studied.

Finally, a satisfaction survey was carried out among fourteen technicians of the paediatric radiology department, for a total of 16 persons. To find out the opinion of the users regarding ease of use, speed of examination, image quality and user-friendliness of each of the two systems the following valuation system was used:

+2 for DR much better than RLMS

+1 for DR better than RLMS

0 if the two systems are equivalent

-1 for RLMS better than DR

-2 for RLMS much better than DR

Results of comparison

Comparative evaluation of the complete patient treatment time found a 30% reduction from 403 seconds to 266 seconds with the FD system compared to the CR system. The patient treatment time was defined as the time when the patient arrived at the waiting room to the time the acquired image was available on the internal network. On an average, time savings between 48% and 59% were achieved for the various examinations from chest to pelvis, with the greatest time savings for pelvis examinations. It was also measured that on an average, 55% time savings could be achieved for single exposure studies and 51% for double exposure studies. While the time requirements of the installation phases were comparable, most timesavings occurred in the film execution phase and especially in the image-processing phase with timesavings values of 42% and 83% respectively. It should be noted that a distance of about 15 meters between the room connected to the RLMS reading system requires an average movement of the technician of about 15 seconds, with sometimes a waiting time if the other room is in use.

The time of the undressing phase was measured at an average of 40 seconds, while the phase following the transfer of the image to the Intranet via the PACS took 95 seconds for both systems. Consequently, a total of 135 seconds on average were reserved for handling a paediatric patient outside of the specific execution of X-ray activity.

For workload distribution, it was observed that by the end of the study, 84% of patients were assigned to the room with the installed flat detector radiography system. This is largely due to preference of the new technology by the users for its image quality, dose savings of up to 40%, and reduction in mAs values while achieving identical image density and contrast.

Eleven of the 14 users surveyed preferred the flat detector system on all performance criteria while three users found the flat detector and CR systems to be similar for one criterion each.

Discussion

The values demonstrated during the time measurements are unambiguous. The flat panel system technology is significantly faster in the three examination phases. These results allowed us to quantify our technological choice of a DR system in a paediatric radiology department with much regular and emergency activity (40% of the total activity), rather than justify to the institution the benefit of the investment.

During the film phase, the flat-panel system allows the image to be visualised within 6 seconds after exposure, while it takes 35 to 55 seconds for reading based on the size of the screen for the RLMS system. The presetting of the opening of the diaphragms as well as automatic marking considerably reduce the time of the image handling phase. This leaves the installation part, which, due to its automation, allows a considerable savings of time with regard to the placement of the material. The “all in one” system which offers the flat panel system allows a large savings of time in personnel movement, as opposed to the RLMS system which requires technicians to move back and forth between the radiodiagnostics room and the plate reader.

The speed of visualising a quality image and the system’s ergonomic design make it a pleasure to use. The paediatric radiology staff is making the utmost attempt to have the patients, parents and staff from clinical departments accompanying the child benefit from this technology, which allows waiting time to be reduced.

The productivity increase of the system frees up technician time and requires a different way of thinking about patient care. This has enabled the staff to devote more time to the quality of patient reception, hygiene regulations and tracking images for archiving and distribution to clinicians. On the other hand, this requires a minimum of two, even three, technicians to ensure continuous use of the installation when there is an overflow of patients.

However, the flat panel system, in its current configuration, may not always be able to completely handle the activity of two radiology installations. The dimensions of the panel do not allow for use in patient beds or on a stretcher. As with any motorised system, manual movement of the suspended system supporting the X-ray tube proved to be difficult and required significant physical effort of the staff. Placement of the bed in the radiology room, moreover, is not easy, taking into account the installed examination table. These drawbacks cause a significant decrease in patient care, which exceed the time needed with a conventional system and cancels out timesavings. Areas of exploration greater than 43 cm (legs and femurs of adolescent patients, teleradiography of the spine and lower extremities) will soon be examinable by means of multiple exposures and image-fusing software. However, performing teleradiography of the spine or lower extremities will still remain impossible for patients with multiple handicaps requiring time for short exposure, thus the use of a single exposure.

In addition, parallel to this study, dosimetric studies confirmed that it was possible to decrease the number of necessary mAs by 40%, while still maintaining identical density and contrast, which proved satisfactory to radiologists and clinicians. This lowering of the applied dose is a major advantage for paediatric X-ray departments where radioprotection is a constant concern.

Conclusion

The flat panel system is a new technology, which allows for a considerable savings of time in standard examinations.

The future availability of software for performing teleradiography could further expand the uses of the system. It has been demonstrated to be particularly effective for the management of a high number of patients in a paediatric department, including an important ratio of emergency cases.

Read More: https://www.europeanhhm.com/diagnostics/digital-radiography

[evonnebaker]

The impressive growth of VNA and PACS Market is attributed to rampant growth in IT-healthcare segment and increasing public health awareness resulting in early disease diagnosis

[technicallyclassyperfection]

Cold planet for warm transmissions!

[innonurse]

Innovative MRI technique 'lights up' pancreatic cancer

- By InnoNurse Staff -

Pancreatic cancer is challenging to detect early because the pancreas is deep in the abdomen, making tumors difficult to identify until it's often too late for treatment. Researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel have developed a new MRI technique that could make these tumors more visible by tracking how cells metabolize glucose.

This method builds on Otto Warburg's discovery that cancer cells consume a large amount of glucose and convert it to lactate.

The new technique uses glucose tagged with deuterium, a stable isotope of hydrogen, which is injected into the bloodstream. This allows MRI scans to detect the deuterium-labeled lactate produced by cancer cells, which conventional MRI cannot do due to the overwhelming signal from water in tissues.

The researchers found that this deuterium MRI method could detect even small tumors in rodent models of aggressive pancreatic cancer, offering more sensitivity than traditional MRI and PET scans. The approach could potentially allow for earlier detection and better monitoring of pancreatic cancer, though further clinical studies are needed to confirm its efficacy in humans. The study was led by Prof. Lucio Frydman and Dr. Elton T. Montrazi, along with collaborators at the Weizmann Institute.

Image: A standard MRI scan (left) did not detect a pancreatic tumor, whereas the tumor was distinctly highlighted in an MRI performed after injecting chemically modified glucose (right). Credit: Weizmann Institute of Science.

Read more at Weizmann Institute of Science

///

Other recent news and insights

eHealth Ventures initiates an accelerated pre-Seed investment program for health tech companies (CTECH)

Neurology: Netherlands-based Vico Therapeutics secures €11.5M (Silicon Canals)

German startup CUREosity secures €3.8M to enhance VR therapy for rehabilitation (Silicon Canals)

[miscellaneous-art]

''Madame Marie Curie dans son Laboratoire.. Carte postale 1er jour. Photo Roger Viollet'' © Bibliothèques d'Université Paris Cité - Histoire de la Santé Cartes postales de radiologie: la Collection Guy et Marie-José Pallardy

[innovativeradiology]

X-Ray Systems For Sale

Discover top-tier digital X-ray systems at Innovative Radiology. Our selection includes Acuity FDR+, Acuity SDR+, Acuity PDR, and Acuity DRe models, designed for superior imaging performance & reliability. Upgrade your medical facility with our advanced X-ray solutions. For any queries call us at 888-909-9894.

[arklifediagnostics]

Discover the Premier Pathology Lab in Angul: Ark Life Diagnostics

When it comes to health and diagnostics, accuracy and reliability are paramount. If you are looking for a trusted pathology lab in Angul, Ark Life Diagnostics stands out as the premier choice. Known for its state-of-the-art facilities, highly qualified staff, and a comprehensive range of diagnostic services, Ark Life Diagnostics is committed to providing the best healthcare solutions to the community.

Why Choose Ark Life Diagnostics?

Ark Life Diagnostics has earned a reputation as the leading pathology lab in Angul due to its unwavering commitment to quality and precision. Here are some compelling reasons to choose Ark Life Diagnostics for all your diagnostic needs:

1. Advanced Technology and Equipment

Ark Life Diagnostics is equipped with the latest technology and cutting-edge equipment to ensure accurate and timely results. The lab employs automated systems and advanced diagnostic tools to provide a wide array of tests, from routine blood tests to specialized diagnostic procedures.

2. Qualified and Experienced Professionals

The team at Ark Life Diagnostics comprises highly qualified pathologists, lab technicians, and support staff who bring years of experience and expertise to the table. Their dedication to maintaining high standards of practice ensures that every test is conducted with precision and care.

3. Comprehensive Range of Services

Ark Life Diagnostics offers a comprehensive range of diagnostic services, including:

Blood Tests: From complete blood counts to specific disease markers, Ark Life Diagnostics covers all essential blood tests.

Urine Analysis: Accurate and detailed urine analysis for detecting various health conditions.

Biopsy and Histopathology: Expert analysis of tissue samples for diagnosing diseases like cancer.

Microbiology: Detection and analysis of infections caused by bacteria, viruses, and other pathogens.

Immunology: Tests to evaluate the immune system and diagnose autoimmune disorders.

4. Convenient and Timely Reporting

Understanding the importance of timely diagnostics in effective treatment, Ark Life Diagnostics ensures quick turnaround times for test results. Patients and doctors can access reports online, making it convenient and efficient.

5. Patient-Centric Approach

At Ark Life Diagnostics, patient care is a top priority. The lab provides a comfortable and hygienic environment, ensuring a pleasant experience for all patients. The friendly and compassionate staff are always ready to assist and answer any queries.

Benefits of Regular Diagnostic Testing

Regular diagnostic testing is crucial for maintaining good health and early detection of potential health issues. Here are some benefits of routine visits to Ark Life Diagnostics:

Early Detection: Identifying health issues at an early stage can lead to more effective treatment and better outcomes.

Monitoring Health: Regular tests help monitor ongoing health conditions and track the effectiveness of treatments.

Preventive Care: Diagnostic tests can reveal risk factors for certain diseases, allowing for preventive measures to be taken.

How to Avail Services at Ark Life Diagnostics

Availing services at Ark Life Diagnostics is simple and hassle-free. Here’s how you can get started:

Visit the Lab: Drop by Ark Life Diagnostics during working hours for on-the-spot testing.

Online Booking: Schedule your tests online through their user-friendly website.

Home Collection: For added convenience, Ark Life Diagnostics offers home sample collection services. Simply book an appointment, and a trained technician will visit your home to collect samples.

Conclusion

Ark Life Diagnostics is the go-to pathology lab in Angul for reliable and accurate diagnostic services. With their advanced technology, expert staff, and patient-centric approach, they are dedicated to ensuring the best healthcare outcomes for all their patients. Whether you need routine tests or specialized diagnostics, Ark Life Diagnostics is committed to providing top-notch services you can trust. Visit Ark Life Diagnostics today and take a proactive step towards better health.

[aishavass]

The impressive growth of VNA and PACS Market is attributed to rampant growth in IT-healthcare segment and increasing public health awareness resulting in...

[sandeep-health-care]

Digital Radiography

The introduction of a flat panel system in a filmless computerised radiology unit allows the productivity of a radiology department to be noticeably increased, while providing ergonomic comfort and ease of use. It is particularly suitable for the field of paediatric radiology.

There are numerous factors that drive a radiology department to adopt digital imaging technology. The use of the Picture Archiving and Communications System (PACS) and hospital managements' need to optimise operating costs for higher efficiency are only two examples.

With these factors and the impending obsolescence of the existing conventional radiography system in some regions, the radiology department (University Hospital of Nancy, France) decided on a fully automated digital flat detector radiography system. Reasons for this decision were the preference for a Flat Detector (FD) system that delivers a high level of automated system movements. Numerous independent studies have proved that flat detector imaging systems improve productivity and deliver significant dose-saving advantages.

Comparing FD and CR systems

This study was performed in a paediatric radiology department of a university hospital with an annual patient throughput of 30,000 for general radiography. 40% of these imaging examinations are emergency cases with the patient throughput remaining at a stable level in recent years. There are two general radiography rooms. The digital flat detector radiography system is installed in one of them while the other room has a conventional radiography unit with a Computerised Radiography (CR) imaging system. The study focussed on the comparative evaluation of the FD system and the CR system with regard to three key indicators: patient throughput, changes of workload within the rooms and user satisfaction.

The equipment that allowed the radioluminescent plate system to be tested is the Siemens (with a free-floating table and of variable height) installation (ceiling-suspended installation), connected to a PCR AC 3000 Philips RLMS system.

The tested DR system is an Axiom Aristos FX Siemens installation (Erlangen – Germany) with a flat panel (Trixell, Moirans – France), large screen (43 cm x 43 cm), with a matrix of 3000 pixels x 3000 pixels. Movements of the panel and the X-ray tube are completely automatic. The computer interface is provided by means of a syngo platform running on Microsoft Windows.

Methods and evaluation

The first part of the study focussed on the comparative evaluation of overall patient throughput. A total of 193 patients were evaluated during the study, with 94 patients examined on the conventional/CR system and 99 patients examined on the FD system. Of these 193 patients, five categories of examinations were evaluated; chest, abdomen, pelvis as well as upper and lower extremities. The examinations were further divided into those with a single exposure and those with two exposures (where frontal and lateral projections are standard). Throughput and average examination time of these procedures were also measured. Additionally, each examination was broken into three phases to analyse where the most benefits were experienced. The three phases were:

Positioning phase: Patient positioning and placement of detector or CR cassette for each respective system.

Execution phase: Execution of the imaging process including exposure, access to patient data, CR cassette processing and visualisation of image for FD system.

Acquisition phase: Consisting of archiving via PACS for the two radiographic systems.

The comparison of the different times for each step of the execution of the action, then by anatomic area explored was done by comparison to averages, using the t test and the Mann-Whitney nonparametric test (SPSS 11.0 software).

The second focus of the study assessed the workload distribution of patients to the two different radiographic rooms over the one year study period. Activity curves were created to allow a time comparison of results and an evaluation of stability over the long-term.

Changes in organisation and division of duties among technicians occasionally involved in the installation of the DR were likewise studied.

Finally, a satisfaction survey was carried out among fourteen technicians of the paediatric radiology department, for a total of 16 persons. To find out the opinion of the users regarding ease of use, speed of examination, image quality and user-friendliness of each of the two systems the following valuation system was used:

+2 for DR much better than RLMS

+1 for DR better than RLMS

0 if the two systems are equivalent

-1 for RLMS better than DR

-2 for RLMS much better than DR

Results of comparison

Comparative evaluation of the complete patient treatment time found a 30% reduction from 403 seconds to 266 seconds with the FD system compared to the CR system. The patient treatment time was defined as the time when the patient arrived at the waiting room to the time the acquired image was available on the internal network. On an average, time savings between 48% and 59% were achieved for the various examinations from chest to pelvis, with the greatest time savings for pelvis examinations. It was also measured that on an average, 55% time savings could be achieved for single exposure studies and 51% for double exposure studies. While the time requirements of the installation phases were comparable, most timesavings occurred in the film execution phase and especially in the image-processing phase with timesavings values of 42% and 83% respectively. It should be noted that a distance of about 15 meters between the room connected to the RLMS reading system requires an average movement of the technician of about 15 seconds, with sometimes a waiting time if the other room is in use.

The time of the undressing phase was measured at an average of 40 seconds, while the phase following the transfer of the image to the Intranet via the PACS took 95 seconds for both systems. Consequently, a total of 135 seconds on average were reserved for handling a paediatric patient outside of the specific execution of X-ray activity.

For workload distribution, it was observed that by the end of the study, 84% of patients were assigned to the room with the installed flat detector radiography system. This is largely due to preference of the new technology by the users for its image quality, dose savings of up to 40%, and reduction in mAs values while achieving identical image density and contrast.

Eleven of the 14 users surveyed preferred the flat detector system on all performance criteria while three users found the flat detector and CR systems to be similar for one criterion each.

Read More: https://www.europeanhhm.com/diagnostics/digital-radiography

[maryharrisk5]

In modern healthcare decision making is crucial to ensure affordable healthcare and patient satisfaction.

[drmanjari]

Digital x-ray & Radiology Imaging Services in Noida

We prioritize diagnostic accuracy at Dr. Manjari Diagnostic Ultrasound-Echo & Heart Care Center. Our experienced radiologists meticulously analyze imaging studies, providing detailed reports to aid in managing and treating medical conditions.