Journal of the American College of Radiology
Volume 5, Issue 11 , Pages 1130-1136, November 2008

Feasibility of Using a Walking Workstation During CT Image Interpretation

  • Jeff L. Fidler, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author and reprints: Jeff L. Fidler, MD, Mayo Clinic, Department of Radiology, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905
  • ,
  • Robert L. MacCarty, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  • ,
  • Stephen J. Swensen, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  • ,
  • James E. Huprich, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  • ,
  • Warren G. Thompson, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  • ,
  • Tanya L. Hoskin, MS

      Affiliations

    • Division of Biostatistics, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  • ,
  • James A. Levine, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota

Objective

Two-thirds of the US population is overweight or obese. Sedentary lifestyles and occupations are one factor in the development of obesity. Methods to help reduce sedentary work environments may help reduce obesity. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of using a walking workstation during computed tomographic image interpretation.

Methods

Two radiologists reinterpreted 100 clinical computed tomographic examinations they had previously interpreted, each while walking at 1 mph on a treadmill using an electronic workstation. Ten cases were reviewed per session. The time period between the initial conventional interpretations and the reinterpretations was greater than one year, to reduce recall bias. Discrepant findings were ranked according to a classification system based on clinical importance on a scale ranging from 1 to 6. Discrepant findings classified as greater than or equal to 3 were considered significant. Detection rates for the initial interpretations and reinterpretations were determined for each reviewer and compared using a paired t-test.

Results

A total of 1,582 findings were reported (825 by reviewer 1 and 757 by reviewer 2). There were 459 findings with clinical importance of 3 or higher. For reviewer 1 (91 cases of at least one important finding), the mean detection rates were 99.0% for the walking technique and 88.9% for the conventional interpretations (P = .0003). For reviewer 2 (89 cases with at least one important finding) the mean detection rates were 99.1% for the walking technique and 81.3% for the conventional interpretations (P < .0001).

Conclusion

The use of a walking workstation for the interpretation of cross-sectional images is feasible. Further studies are needed to assess the potential impact on diagnostic accuracy.

Key Words: CT image interpretation, CT comparison studies, CT accuracy, exercise, caloric expenditure, treadmill, CT PACS

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1546-1440(08)00228-7

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2008.05.003

Journal of the American College of Radiology
Volume 5, Issue 11 , Pages 1130-1136, November 2008