Comparison of medical and non-medical monitors used for diagnosis

Congress:

ECR 2020

Poster Number:

C-14119

Type:

Educational Exhibit

Keywords:

Not applicable, Quality assurance, Technical aspects, Physics, Image manipulation / Reconstruction, Radiation physics, Image Quality

Authors:

M. C. Siria López, B. García Bonnail, P. Saldaña; Barcelona/ES

DOI:

10.26044/ecr2020/C-14119

DOI-Link:

https://dx.doi.org/10.26044/ecr2020/C-14119

Fig. 1: Photometer (RTI Group, Sweden)

Fig. 2: Detector & patternsTG18-UNL10 and TG18-UNL18

Fig. 3: Detector & patters TG18 UNL-01-02...18

Fig. 4: TG18-UNL Patterns and measurements results

Learning objectives

Study the temporal evolution of luminosity, uniformity and DICOM calibration. Comparison between medical grade and non-medical grade monitors used for diagnostic.

Background

Twelve medical grade monitors and seven non-medical grade monitors were measured following AAPM TG-18 report. A L-100 photometer (RTI Group, Sweden) was used in all the luminance measures using the TG-18 patterns. (figure 1) These patterns fit the monitor when it is 1K (1280 x 1024-pixel size) or 2K (3280 x 2048-pixel size). The patterns were displayed at maximum resolution (one pixel of the monitor matched one pixel of the image). For the Brightness and luminance Uniformity test, the TG18-UNL10 and TG18-UNL18 patterns (figure 2)...

Findings and procedure details

Average maximum and minimum luminosity between medical and non-medical monitors between the years from 2013 to 2018 is (figure 5 and 6): Average màximum luminance medical grade: 330,53 cd/m2 Average màximum luminance non-medical grade:85,89 cd/m2 Difference between them 244,62% Average mínimum luminance medical grade monitors: 0.38 cd/m2 Average mínimum luminance non-medical grade 7 and 8): UNL-10:Monitor 30358064 (2018), monitor 0530299 (2013) and serie 230WP7 (2017) out of tolerance. UNL-80: All equipment proves to be in tolerance except monitor 230WP7 non-medical grade monitor.

Conclusion

We have verified that maximum luminance is much lower in non-medical grade monitors. Non-medical grade monitors do not comply with the DICOM calibration curve. The luminance is more stable than the brightness uniformity between the equipment Non-medical grade monitors do not comply with recommended tolerances for maximum luminosity and DICOM calibration. The user of medical grade monitors is recomemended for diagnosis Limitations A possible limitation is the limited number of years from which we have QA data. (figure 9)

Personal information and conflict of interest

M. C. Siria López; Barcelona/ES - nothing to disclose P. Saldaña; Barcelona/ES - nothing to disclose B. García Bonnail; Barcelona/ES - nothing to disclose

References

Samei E,Badano A, Chakraborty D, Compton K, Cornelius C,Corrigan K, Flynn MJ, Hemminger B, Hangiandreou N,Johnson J,Moxley M, Pavlicek W, Roehrig H, Rutz L, Shepard J, Uzenoff R, Wang J, Willis C.Assessment of Display Performance for Medical Imaging Systems,Report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 18,Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, WI, AAPM On-Line Report No. 03, April 2005.