The Effect Of Digital Imaging On Radiography Work Practice
Mohamed M Abuzaid, Rasha Saad, W. Elshami, S. Alyafei
Keywords: Digital Imaging, Performance, Radiography, Work Practice
ABSTRACT: The use of digital imaging for the diagnostic purpose has been increased during last few years. This technique has brought advancement in the field of radiography. The effect of digital imaging on workflow has a direct relation with the performance of technologists. Aim: The predestined aim of this study was to analyze the use and influence of digital imaging on the workflow of the radiologists and also to demonstrate the effects on the overall performance of healthcare delivery. Method: A quantitative method of analysis is used in this study and the study instrument consisted of a questionnaire. The questions relates to the effect of digital imaging on workflow and image quality. Total of100 questionnaires were distributed, and 82 of them were retrieved back. The inclusion criteria include healthcare providers who are radiographers, radiologist and radiology nurses. The healthcare providers of all ages, gender, and ethnicity, were included in this study. Results: according to 70.2% of the study participants, digital imaging has reduced the workflow and processes of radiography, whereas, 96.3% of the participants reported that digital imaging technique has improved their clinical performance. Conclusion: It is therefore concluded that digital imaging is a valuable in improving the quality of diagnosis in the field of radiography. Further, it is highly cost-effective, time-saving, digital imaging shows a positive and promising effect on the work practice of radiologists and also provides improved diagnostic results.
 Kotre, CJ, Marshall NW. A review of image quality and dose issues in digital fluorography and digital subtraction angiography. Radiation protection dosimetry 2001; 94(12): 73-6. Retrieved from, http://rpd.oxfordjournals.org/content/94/1-2/73.short
 Cabrera A. Defining the role of a PACS technologist. Journal of digital imaging 2002; 15: 120-3. Retrieved from, http://www.springerlink.com/index/UHTX3N41RA0LDMGW.pdf
 Carrino, JA. Digital imaging overview.In Seminars in roentgenology. WB Saunders. 2003;38 (3): 200-215.
 Foord, K. Year 2000: status of picture archiving and digital imaging in European hospitals. European radiology 2000; 11(3): 513-24. Retrieved from, http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s003300000657
 Larsson, W., Aspelin, P., Bergquist, M., et al. The effects of PACS on radiographer's work practice. Radiography 2007; 13(3): 235-40. Retrieved from, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817406000186
 Lau, S L, Mak, A S H, Lam, WT, Chau, CK, Lau, KY. Reject analysis: a comparison of conventional film–screen radiography and computed radiography with PACS. Radiography, 2004, 10(3), 183-187. Retrieved from, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817404000719
 Larsson W, Lundberg N, Hillergård K. Use your good judgement–Radiographers’ knowledge in image production work. Radiography 2009; 15(3): e11-21. Retrieved from, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817408001016
 Fridell K, Aspelin P, Edgren L, Lindsköld L, Lundberg N. PACS influence the radiographer's work. Radiography 2009; 15(2): 121-33. Retrieved from, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S107881740800028X
 Strickland, N H. PACS (picture archiving and communication systems): filmless radiology. Archives of disease in childhood, 2000; 83(1), 82-86. Retrieved from,http://adc.bmj.com/content/83/1/82.full.html
 Wenzel A., Møystad A. Work flow with digital intraoral radiography: a systematic review. ActaodontologicaScandinavica, 2010; 68(2), 106-114. Retrieved from, http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/00016350903514426
 Compagnone G., Baleni M C., Pagan L, Calzolaio F L, Barozzi L, Bergamini C. Comparison of radiation doses to patients undergoing standard radiographic examinations with conventional screen–film radiography, computed radiography and direct digital radiography. 2014. Retrieved from, http://www.birpublications.org/doi/full/10.1259/bjr/57138583
 Prabhu, S P., Gandhi S, Goddard P R. Ergonomics of digital imaging. Ergonomics, 2014; 78(931). Retrieved from, http://www.birpublications.org/doi/full/10.1259/bjr/51650129
 Hellén-Halme K, Nilsson M., Petersson A. Digital radiography in general dental practice: a field study. 2014. Retrieved from, http://www.birpublications.org/doi/full/10.1259/dmfr/95125494
 Seeram E. Irreversible compression in digital radiology.A literature review. Radiography 2006; 12(1): 45-59.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S107881740500057X
 Haak R, WichtMJ, Nowak G, and Hellmich M. Influence of displayed image size on radiographic detection of approximal caries 2014.http://www.birpublications.org/doi/full/10.1259/dmfr/17654484
 Bryman A. Social research methods. Oxford University press 2012. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=vCq5m2hPkOMC&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=advantages+of+quantitative+studies&ots=CKNiGp4_rw&sig=8-VZs9SKzwjI6ehFvgzURzsHxEY
 Barrett HH, Swindell W Eds. Radiological imaging: the theory of image formation, detection, and processing. Elsevier, 2012.https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jzy2HqpCzFQC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=significance+of+image+detection+in+radiography&ots=AYipKQgvuQ&sig=2WaJ-FrnViRffSv98E-VGk_F3bY
 Cohenca N, Simon JH, Roges R, Morag Y, Malfaz, JM. Clinical indications for digital imaging in dento‐alveolar trauma.Part 1: traumatic injuries. Dental Traumatology 2007; 23(2): 95-104. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-9657.2006.00509.x/full
 CanessaJC, Canessa G, Canessa G G, Guan S. U.S. Patent No. 7,120,644. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2006. https://www.google.com/patents/US7120644
 Rasha Saad, Jiyauddin Khan, VivegananthKrishnanmurthi, FadliAsmani, Eddy Yusuf: Effect of Different Extraction Techniques of Persicaria odorata Extracts Utilizing Anti-bacterial Bioassay. British journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 09/2014; 4(4):2146-2154.