泰山医学院学报
泰山醫學院學報
태산의학원학보
JOURNAL OF TAISHAN MEDICAL COLLEGE
2007年
1期
59-61
,共3页
采光%影响识读,光密度测定法%X线%评价研究
採光%影響識讀,光密度測定法%X線%評價研究
채광%영향식독,광밀도측정법%X선%평개연구
Lighting%Imaging reading%Densitometry,X - ray%Evaluation studies
目的 参照DIN(多伊奇工业标准)6856等有关国际标准,对影响影像诊断质量因素之一的阅片室内环境(IRR)进行检测与分析.方法 采用工业光度学测定方法,用风光牌ZF-2型照度计对山东省的省、地(市)、县三级医院共44个阅片室内的IRR进行检测,并进行统计学处理.结果 (1)各级医院IRR普遍偏高,不合格率(按超过100LX计)45.45%;最严重者竟高达520lx,超过允许最大值(100lx)5倍多;(2)各级医院间IRR不合格率比较,无显著差异(X2=4.0813,P＜0.05),即IRR的状况不因医院的升高而有所改善.(3)影像科室与非影像科室相比较,具有显著性差异(X2=4.0813,P＜0.05),印非影像科室的IRR尤其不符合医学影像的诊断阅片要求.结论 本检测结果表示:各级医院的IRR不合格率偏高,尤以影像科室为重,不符合现代医学影像的诊断阅片要求,难以保证诊断质量,亟待解决.
目的 參照DIN(多伊奇工業標準)6856等有關國際標準,對影響影像診斷質量因素之一的閱片室內環境(IRR)進行檢測與分析.方法 採用工業光度學測定方法,用風光牌ZF-2型照度計對山東省的省、地(市)、縣三級醫院共44箇閱片室內的IRR進行檢測,併進行統計學處理.結果 (1)各級醫院IRR普遍偏高,不閤格率(按超過100LX計)45.45%;最嚴重者竟高達520lx,超過允許最大值(100lx)5倍多;(2)各級醫院間IRR不閤格率比較,無顯著差異(X2=4.0813,P＜0.05),即IRR的狀況不因醫院的升高而有所改善.(3)影像科室與非影像科室相比較,具有顯著性差異(X2=4.0813,P＜0.05),印非影像科室的IRR尤其不符閤醫學影像的診斷閱片要求.結論 本檢測結果錶示:各級醫院的IRR不閤格率偏高,尤以影像科室為重,不符閤現代醫學影像的診斷閱片要求,難以保證診斷質量,亟待解決.
목적 삼조DIN(다이기공업표준)6856등유관국제표준,대영향영상진단질량인소지일적열편실내배경(IRR)진행검측여분석.방법 채용공업광도학측정방법,용풍광패ZF-2형조도계대산동성적성、지(시)、현삼급의원공44개열편실내적IRR진행검측,병진행통계학처리.결과 (1)각급의원IRR보편편고,불합격솔(안초과100LX계)45.45%;최엄중자경고체520lx,초과윤허최대치(100lx)5배다;(2)각급의원간IRR불합격솔비교,무현저차이(X2=4.0813,P＜0.05),즉IRR적상황불인의원적승고이유소개선.(3)영상과실여비영상과실상비교,구유현저성차이(X2=4.0813,P＜0.05),인비영상과실적IRR우기불부합의학영상적진단열편요구.결론 본검측결과표시:각급의원적IRR불합격솔편고,우이영상과실위중,불부합현대의학영상적진단열편요구,난이보증진단질량,극대해결.
Objective: To reserch one of the factors that influences the quality of photographic diagnosis - - - illuminance in reading room (IRR) according to the relevant international standard. Methods:By the industrial optics testing methd , a test was made on IRR of 44 reading rooms in the hospitals of Shandong province with Illuminance - meter of Fengguang ZF - 2, and the data were statistically analyzed. Results ( 1 ) IRR in all the grades of hospitals was generally higher , and 45.5% of it was not in keeping with the standard, and the largest value was 520 lx, which was five times as large as the maxmum value which was avaluable. (2)Comparting the unqualified rate of IRR in all the grades of hospitals,we could see there was no noticeable difference(χ2 =0. 0387 ,P ＜0. 05) ,that is to say,IRR couldn't be improved just because the grade of the hospital was higher. (3) Comparing the photographic department with the non -photogtaphic one ,we could see there was noticeable difference(χ2 =4. 0813,P ＜0. 05),that is to say,IRR in the non- photographic department especially did not meet the requirement of photographic diagnosis. Conclusion The results of the test show that the IRR in all the grades of hospitals is not in keeping with the standard,especially in the non- photographic department ,and doesnt meet the photogtaphic diagnosis requirement of modern medical imaging. This cant guarantee the diagnosis quality,which must be solved at once.
