7 research outputs found
Current and future funding streams for paediatric postmortem imaging: European Society of Paediatric Radiology survey results.
BACKGROUND: Perinatal and childhood postmortem imaging has been accepted as a noninvasive alternative or adjunct to autopsy. However, the variation in funding models from institution to institution is a major factor prohibiting uniform provision of this service. OBJECTIVE: To describe current funding models employed in European and non-European institutions offering paediatric postmortem imaging services and to discuss the perceived barriers to future postmortem imaging service provision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A web-based 16-question survey was distributed to members of the European Society of Paediatric Radiology (ESPR) and ESPR postmortem imaging task force over a 6-month period (March-August 2021). Survey questions related to the radiologic and autopsy services being offered and how each was funded within the respondent's institute. RESULTS: Eighteen individual responses were received (13/18, 72.2% from Europe). Only one-third of the institutions (6/18, 33.3%) have fully funded postmortem imaging services, with the remainder receiving partial (6/18, 33.3%) or no funding (5/18, 27.8%). Funding (full or partial) was more commonly available for forensic work (13/18, 72%), particularly where this was nationally provided. Where funding was not provided, the imaging and reporting costs were absorbed by the institute. CONCLUSION: Increased access is required for the expansion of postmortem imaging into routine clinical use. This can only be achieved with formal funding on a national level, potentially through health care commissioning and acknowledgement by health care policy makers and pathology services of the value the service provides following the death of a fetus or child. Funding should include the costs involved in training, equipment, reporting and image acquisition
Comparison of Color LCD and Medical-grade Monochrome LCD Displays in Diagnostic Radiology
In diagnostic radiology, medical-grade monochrome displays are usually recommended because of their higher luminance. Standard color displays can be used as a less expensive alternative, but have a lower luminance. The aim of the present study was to compare image quality for these two types of displays. Images of a CDRAD contrast-detail phantom were read by four radiologists using a 2-megapixel (MP) color display (143Â cd/m2 maximum luminance) as well as 2-MP (295Â cd/m2) and 3-MP monochrome displays. Thirty lumbar spine radiographs were also read by four radiologists using the color and the 2-MP monochrome display in a visual grading analysis (VGA). Very small differences were found between the displays when reading the CDRAD images. The VGA scores were â0.28 for the color and â0.25 for the monochrome display (pâ=â0.24; NS). It thus seems possible to use color displays in diagnostic radiology provided that grayscale adjustment is used