title: Comparison between different cost devices for digital capture of X-ray films: an image characteristics detection approach.
abstract: A common teleradiology practice is digitizing films. The costs of specialized digitizers are very high, that is why there is a trend to use conventional scanners and digital cameras. Statistical clinical studies are required to determine the accuracy of these devices, which are very difficult to carry out. The purpose of this study was to compare three capture devices in terms of their capacity to detect several image characteristics. Spatial resolution, contrast, gray levels, and geometric deformation were compared for a specialized digitizer ICR (US$ 15,000), a conventional scanner UMAX (US$ 1,800), and a digital camera LUMIX (US$ 450, but require an additional support system and a light box for about US$ 400). Test patterns printed in films were used. The results detected gray levels lower than real values for all three devices; acceptable contrast and low geometric deformation with three devices. All three devices are appropriate solutions, but a digital camera requires more operator training and more settings.
authors: Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia. ant-sala@uniandes.edu.co
authors: Antonio José
authors: AJ
authors: Salazar
authors: Juan Camilo
authors: JC
authors: Camacho
authors: Diego Andrés
authors: DA
authors: Aguirre
references: Radiology. 1985 Feb;154(2):519-27
references: 3966138
references: J Digit Imaging. 1995 Feb;8(1 Suppl 1):31-6
references: 7734537
references: Radiology. 1990 Mar;174(3 Pt 1):775-80
references: 2305061
references: Radiat Med. 2005 May;23(3):170-4
references: 15940063
references: Radiology. 1993 May;187(2):527-33
references: 8475302
references: Int J Infect Dis. 2006 Mar;10(2):129-35
references: 16243559
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999 Oct;173(4):889-94
references: 10511142
references: J Digit Imaging. 1992 Feb;5(1):54-8
references: 1554759
references: Int J Med Inform. 2004 Feb;73(1):65-73
references: 15036080
references: Telemed J. 1995 Summer;1(2):107-14
references: 10165329
references: Radiology. 1997 Dec;205(3):859-63
references: 9393548
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Nov;175(5):1233-8
references: 11044013
references: Telemed J E Health. 2005 Apr;11(2):130-6
references: 15857253
references: Acad Radiol. 1995 Mar;2 Suppl 1:S22-9; discussion S57-64, S70-1 pas
references: 9419702
references: Pediatr Radiol. 2001 Dec;31(12):841-7
references: 11727017
references: Radiology. 1982 Apr;143(1):29-36
references: 7063747
references: J Digit Imaging. 2007 Mar;20(1):42-52
references: 17191103
references: Telemed J E Health. 2000 Fall;6(3):297-302
references: 11110633
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Sep;175(3):603-8
references: 10954438