Medical Image Quality as a Socio-technical Phenomenon

M. Aanestad; B. Edwin; R. Mårvik

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1634222

Methods of Information in Medicine, Table of Contents

Methods Inf Med 2003; 42(04): 302-306
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634222

Original article

Schattauer GmbH

Medical Image Quality as a Socio-technical Phenomenon

M. Aanestad

¹Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway

²The Interventional Centre, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway

,

B. Edwin

²The Interventional Centre, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway

,

R. Mårvik

³National Centre for Advanced Laparoscopic Surgery, St. Olav Hospital, Trondheim, Norway

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Summary

Objectives: The study aims to interpret image quality in laparoscopic surgery not only as a technical parameter but also as the result of the situation of use.

Methods: Observational studies of laparoscopy in use, semi-structured and informal interviews with laparoscopists.

Results: When medical images are digitized to exploit novel technical possibilities, image quality becomes a paramount issue. Image quality is often discussed exclusively in technical terms, but the socio-technical study of image quality in surgical telemedicine presented in this paper showed that it is definitely more than a purely technical parameter.

Conclusions: While the resulting quality of the image was significantly shaped by the persons involved, the concept of “quality” itself was also relative and changing with the situation of use. A given technology does not determine image quality. Rather than focusing only on the technical quality, the attention of designers and decision makers should also be directed to the socio-technical network surrounding the image and its use.

Keywords

Laparoscopy - surgery - telemedicine - image quality - video quality

Full Text

References

References
1 Marmolin H. Subjective MSE measures. IEEE Transaction on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 1986; 16: 486-9.
2 Eckstein MP, Morioka CA, Whiting JS, Eigler N. Psychophysical evaluation of the effect of JPEG, full-frame DCT and wavelet image compression on signal detection in medical image noise. In: Kundel H. editor. Proceedings to the International Society of Optical Engineers (SPIE) Medical Imaging Annual Meeting, Medical Image Perception. 1995. pp. 79-89.
3 Cosman PC, Gray RM, Olshen R. Evaluating quality of compressed medical images: SNR, subjective rating and diagnostic accuracy. Proceedings of the IEEE 1994; 82: 919-32.
4 Fish RS, Hudd TH. A subjective visual quality comparison of NTSC, VHS and compressed DS1-compatible video. Proceedings of the SID 1991; 32: 157-63.
5 Okumura A, Suzuki J, Furukawa I, Ono S, Ashihara T. Signal analysis and performance evaluation of pathological microscopic images. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 1997; 16: 701-10.
6 Adams CN, Aiyer A, Betts BJ, Li J, Cosman PC. et al. Evaluating quality and utility of digital mammograms and lossy compressed digital mammograms. Proceeding of the 3rd International Workshop on Digital Mammography. 1996: 169-76.
7 Perlmutter SM, Cosman PC, Gray RM, Olshen RA, Ikeda D, Adams CN. et al. Image quality in lossy compressed digital mammograms. signal processing, Special Section on Medical Image Compression 1997; 59: 189-210.
8 Foran DJ, Meer PP, Papathomas T, Marsic I. Compression guidelines for diagnostic telepathology. IEEE Transactions of Information Technology in Biomedicine 1997; 1: 55-60.
9 Taylor PA. Survey of research in telemedicine 1, telemedicine systems. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 1998; 4: 1-17.
10 Hiatt JR, Shabot M, Phillips EH, Haines RF, Grant TL. Telesurgery: Acceptability of compressed video for remote surgical proctoring. Archives of Surgery 1996; 131: 396-401.
11 Buanes T, Kåresen R, Geitung JT, Eide K, Røtnes JS. Experience with telesurgery and radiology via an ATM network. Proceedings from the 13th International Congress and Exhibition: Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, CARS’99. 1999: 541-44.
12 Rosser JC, Bell RL, Harnett B, Rodas E, Murayama M, Merrell R. Use of mobile low-bandwidth telemedical techniques for extreme telemedical applications. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 1999; 189: 397-404.
13 Berg M. Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach. Int J Med Inf 1999; 55: 87-101.
14 Klein HK, Myers MD. A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly 1999; 23: 67-93.
15 Walsham G. The emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Information Systems Research 1997; 6: 376-94.
16 Schurr MO, Kunert W, Neck J, Voges U, Buess GF. Telematics and telemanipulation in surgery. Minimal Invasive Therapies and Allied Technologies 1998; 7: 93-103.
17 Moses P, Ricci M, McGowan J, Callas P. Diagnostic Quality of endoscopic images in a telemedicine application. Proc AMIA Ann Fall Symp. 1997: 976.
18 Broderick TJ, Harnett BM, Merriam NR, Ka-poor V, Doarn CR, Merrell RC. Impact of varying transmission bandwidth on image quality. Telemedicine Journal and e-Health 2001; 7: 47-53.
19 Malone FD, Athanassiou A, Nores J, D’Alton ME. Effect of ISDN bandwidth on image quality for telemedicine transmission of obstetric ultrasonography. Telemedicine Journal 1998; 4: 161-5.
20 Marescaux J, Mutter D, Vix M, Russier Y. From teleteaching to teleaccreditation. Minimal Invasive Therapies and Allied Technologies, 1998; 7: 79-84.
21 Cheriff AD, Schulam PG, Docimo SG, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR. Telesurgical consultation. The Journal of Urology 1996; 156: 1391-3.
22 Schulam PG, Docimo SG, Saleh W, Breitenbach C, Moore RG, Kavoussi L. Telesurgical mentoring: initial clinical experience. Surgical Endoscopy 1997; 11: 1001-5.
23 Demartines N, Otto U, Mutter D, Labler L, von Weymarn A, Vix M, Harder F. An evaluation of telemedicine in surgery: telediagnosis compared with direct diagnosis. Archives of Surgery 2000; 135: 849-53.
24 Rosser JC, Wood M, Payne JH, Fullum TM, Lisehora GB, Rosser LE, Barcia PJ, Savalgi RS. Telementoring. Surgical Endoscopy 1997; 11: 852-5.