Abstract
A considerable number of prototype and commerical workstations have been developed during the last 10 years for electronic display of computed tomographic (CT) images during clinical interpretation. These CT workstations have varied widely in the number and size of monitors available for the display of the medical images ranging from a single 1,024×1,204-pixel monitor, to eight 2,500×2,000-pixel monitors. Image display times also have varied considerably, ranging from as fast as. 11 seconds, to as slow as 26 seconds to fill a single monitor. No consensus has formed in the workstation community with regard to display area and response time requirements. To address this issue, we have constructed a time-motion model of CT interpretation. Model accuracy is experimentally verified with three workstations as well as with the film alternator. In general, CT interpretations with an electronic workstation become faster as display area increases and display time decreases. Results can be used by workstation designers and purchasers to roughly estimate differences in interpretation speeds among contending CT workstation designs.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arenson RL, van der Voorde F, Stevens JF: Improved financial management of the radiology department with a microcosting system. Radiology 166:255–259, 1988
Beard DV, Parrish D, Stevension D: A cost analysis of film image management and four PACS based on different network protocols. J Digit Imaging 3:108–118, 1990
Pizer SM: Psychovisual issues in the display of medical images, in Hoehne KH (ed): Pictorial Information Systems in Medicine. Berlin, Germany, Springer Verlag, 1985, pp. 235–250
Pizer SM, Beard DV: Medical image workstations: State of science and technology. J Digi Imaging 2:185–193, 1989
Arenson RL, Chakraborty DP, Seshadri SB, et al.: The digital imaging workstation. Radiology 176:303–315, 1990
Foley WD, Jacobson DR, Taylor AJ, et al.: Display of CT studies on a two-screen electronic workstation versus a film panel alternator: Sensitivy and efficiency among radiologists. Radiology 174:769–773, 1990
Johnston RE, Yankaskas BC, Perry JR, et al.: Agreement experiments: A method for quantitatively testing new medical image display approaches. SPIE Medical Imaging IV: PACS System Design and Evaluation 1234:621–630, 1990
Brown JJ, Malchow SC, Totty WG, et al.: MR examination of the knee: Interpretation with multiscreen digital workstation vs hardcopy format. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157:81–85, 1991
Berbaum KS, Franken EA, Honda H, et al.: Evaluation of a PACS workstation for assessment of body CT studies. J Computer Assisted Tomography 4:853–858, 1990
Straub WH, Gur D, Good WF, et al.: Primary CT diagnosis of abdominal masses in a PACS environment. Radiology 1:739–743, 1991
Miller GA: The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limkits on our capacity for processing information. Psycholog Rev 63:81–97, 1956
Beard DV: Designing a radiology workstation: A focus on navigation during the interpretation task. J Digit Imaging 3:152–163, 1990
Beard DV, Perry R, Muller K, et al.: Evaluation of total workstation CT interpretation quality: A single-screen pilot Study. SPIE Medical Imaging V: PACS Design and Evaluation 1446:52–58, 1991
Beard DV, Hemminger BM, Perry JR, et al.: Single-screen workstation vs. film alternator for fast CT interpretation. Radiology 187:1–6, 1993
Young R: The machine inside the machines: User's models of pocket calculators. Int J Man-Machine Studies 15:51–85, 1981
Beard DV, Hemminger BM, Pisano ED, et al: CT Interpretations with a low cost workstation: A timing studh. JDI 1993 (in press)
Gilbreth FB: Motion Studh. New York, NY, Van Nostrand, 1911
Card SK, Moran TP, Newell A: The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems. Communications of the ACM 23:396–410, 1980
Card SK, Moran TP, Newell A: The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983
Roberts, TL: Evaluation of computer text editors. Doctoral Thesis, Stanford, CA, Stanford University, 1979
Kieras DE, Polson PG: An approach to the formal analysis of user complexity. Int J Man-Machine Studies 2:365–394, 1985
Kieras DE, Bovair S: The acquisition of procedures from text: A production-system analysis of transfer of training. J Memory Language 2:507–524, 1986
Kieras DE: The role of cognitive simulation models in the development of advanced training and testing systems, in Frederiksen N, Glaser R, Lesgold A, et al (eds.): Diagnostic Monitoring of Skill and Knowledge Acquisition, Hillsdale NJ, Erlbaum, 1990
Grey MD, John BE, Atwood ME: The precision of project ernestine or an overview of a validation of GOMS. Proc CHI Monterey, CA, '92 Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, ACM, 1992
Fitts PM: The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 47:381–391, 1954
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was sponsored by National Institutes of Health Grant No. R01 CA44060.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beard, D.V., Hemminger, B.M., Denelsbeck, K.M. et al. How many screens does a CT workstation need?. J Digit Imaging 7, 69–76 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168425
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168425