Timothy R. Daly RT(R)(QM), Presenter: Nothing to Disclose

Beth A. Schueler PhD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Alisa Ingrid Walz-Flannigan PhD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Daniel A. Erickson ARRT, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Jill Marie Lucas RT (R)(M), Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Dayne Magnuson RT(R)(QM), Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Many facilities are considering transitioning from cassette-based computed radiography (CR) to digital radiography (DR). Justification of the higher purchase cost of DR must include careful consideration of workflow efficiency differences between the two modalities. 

Various CR equipment configurations were analyzed, including placement and type of reader (single-plate or multi-plate) and placement of CR workstations (shared between rooms or dedicated). Results are compared against both fixed and retrofitted wireless flat panel detector DR systems. Workflow efficiency was measured by reproducing typical radiographic examinations under scripted conditions to eliminate patient and peripheral care aspects, leaving only equipment and user interface differences.

For both CR and DR, equipment configuration significantly affects technologist productivity. An optimally-configured CR practice can be as efficient as a DR system, at a lower purchase cost. For a high volume practice, the most efficient CR configuration was found to consist of a dedicated workstation and multi-plate reader in the control booth of each exam room. Retrofit DR systems can be cost-effective, but suffer from the need to manually collimate and physical detector manipulation.  

Daly, T, Schueler, B, Walz-Flannigan, A, Erickson, D, Lucas, J, Magnuson, D, DR vs CR Exam Efficiency and Cost Comparison.  Radiological Society of North America 2011 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, November 26 - December 2, 2011 ,Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2011/11004927.html