The influence of liquid crystal display monitors on observer performance for the detection of interstitial lung markings on both storage phosphor and flat-panel-detector chest radiography

PurposeTo compare observer performance with a flat-panel liquid crystal display (LCD) monitor and with a high-resolution gray-scale cathode ray tube (CRT) monitor in the detection of interstitial lung markings using a silicon flat-panel-detector direct radiography (DR) and storage phosphor computed radiography (CR) in a clinical setting.Materials and methodsWe displayed 39 sets of posteroanterior chest radiographs from the patients who were suspected of interstitial lung disease. Each sets consisted of DR, CR and thin-section CT as the reference standard. Image identities were masked, randomly sorted, and displayed on both five mega pixel (2048 × 2560 × 8 bits) LCD and CRT monitors. Ten radiologists independently rated their confidence in detection for the presence of linear opacities in the four fields of the lungs; right upper, left upper, right lower, and left lower quadrant. Performance of a total 6240 (39 sets × 2 detector systems × 2 monitor system × 4 fields × 10 observers) observations was analyzed by multi-reader multi-case receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Differences between monitor systems in combinations of detector systems were compared using ANOVA and paired-samples t-test.ResultsArea under curves (AUC) for the presence of linear opacities measured by ROC analysis was higher on the LCDs than CRTs without statistical significance (p = 0.082). AUC was significantly higher on the DR systems than CR systems (p = 0.006). AUC was significantly higher on the LCDs than CRTs for DR systems (p = 0.039) but not different for CR systems (p = 0.301).ConclusionIn clinical conditions, performance of the LCD monitor appears to be better for detecting interstitial lung markings when interfaced with DR systems.