RESUMO
Background: The blue-light hazard is a well-documented entity addressing the detrimental health effects of high-energy visible light photons in the range of 305 nm - 450 nm. Radiologists spend long hours in front of multiple light-emitting diode (LED)-based diagnostic monitors emitting blue light, predisposing them to potentially higher blue-light dosages than other health professionals. Objectives: The authors aimed to quantify the blue light that radiology registrars are exposed to in daily viewing of diagnostic monitors and compared this with international occupational safety standards. Method: A limited cross-sectional observational study was conducted. Four radiology registrars at two academic hospitals in Bloemfontein from 01 October 2021 to 30 November 2021 participated. Diagnostic monitor viewing times on a standard workday were determined. Different image modalities obtained from 01 June 2019 to 30 November 2019 were assessed, and blue-light radiance was determined using a spectroscope and image analysis software. Blue-light radiance values were compared with international safety standards. Results: Radiology registrars spent on average 380 min in front of a diagnostic display unit daily. Blue-light radiance from diagnostic monitors was elevated in higher-intensity images such as chest radiographs and lower for darker images like MRI brain studies. The total blue-light radiance from diagnostic display units was more than 10 000 times below the recommended threshold value for blue-light exposure. Conclusion: Blue-light radiance from diagnostic displays measured well below the recommended values for occupational safety. Hence, blue-light exposure from diagnostic monitors does not significantly add to the occupational health burden of radiologists. Contribution: Despite spending long hours in front of diagnostic monitors, radiologists' exposure to effective blue-light radiance from monitors was far below hazardous values. This suggests that blue-light exposure from diagnostic monitors does not increase the occupational health burden of radiologists.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Sending radiographic images as instant messages have become a common means of communication between physicians, aiding in triaging and transfer decision-making in emergencies. While use of technology is increasing, this is not the case for the underserved or rural areas of South Africa with no picture archiving and communications system or advanced hardware in place. In these areas, the medical staffing population have nearly universal access to smartphones and could benefit from the ability to share images quickly and easily with trained radiologists. South African data on diagnostic reliability of smartphone captured radiology images is lacking. The objective of the study was to determine the accuracy and reliability of diagnoses made on radiologic images captured with smartphone compared to radiologic images on picture archiving and communication system(PACS). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with radiographs from June 2018 to July 2019 selected from the PACS system at Pelonomi Tertiary Hospital. Images were displayed on PACS computer screen and captured by principal researcher using a smartphone. Five radiology registrars received the images via WhatsApp® and reviewed them on smartphones. After three weeks, registrars viewed images in random order on PACS stations. McNemar's test was used to compare the diagnostic accuracy of smartphone vs PACS and Kappa values calculated for agreement. Reliability was assessed by analysing the results of different registrars and diagnoses separately. RESULTS: 135 X-rays, representative of common emergency conditions, were selected. For all registrars, PACS accuracy was generally higher than smartphone accuracy. The Kappa values all indicated fair to moderate agreement between smartphone and PACS diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Capturing radiographic images using at least 12-megapixel smartphone and sharing them via WhatsApp® is a reliable method that can be used with a high degree of confidence in emergencies to aid clinical decision making. This method of viewing medical imaging is however not a substitution for images viewed on PACS.
