Working environment dictates best monitor choice

Article

While workstations have matured along with PACS, the confusion surrounding them has not gone away. The question arises early and often in filmless hospitals: whether and when to use 2K (2048 x 2560 pixels) monitors instead of the older 1K (1280 x 1024

While workstations have matured along with PACS, the confusion surrounding them has not gone away. The question arises early and often in filmless hospitals: whether and when to use 2K (2048 x 2560 pixels) monitors instead of the older 1K (1280 x 1024 pixels) models.

It's not always a question of cost.

"I think that each has a role," said Dr. Bradley J. Erickson, a diagnostic radiologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. "1K monitors with appropriate software are acceptable for low-volume image review areas. For high-volume viewing areas, like radiology reading rooms, 2K monitors make sense because here they are cost-effective."

Low-volume viewing areas are usually found in places like the emergency department, ICU, or orthopedics, where referring physicians use high-end secondary review workstations. These feature the same high-resolution monitors as primary reading stations but with a simplified tool palette.

Justifying the cost of a 2K may not be as easy in these secondary viewing areas as in primary reading rooms. The manufacturing cost of a 2K is approximately 2.2 times higher than a 1K.

Manufacturers tend to agree.

"We generally propose 2K for diagnostic reading in two- or four-monitor versions," said Alan J. Orth, vice president of marketing for DeJarnette Research Systems. "For clinical (secondary) review, such as the emergency department or ICU, we suggest 1K in one- or two-monitor configurations."

All other factors being equal, 1K monitors have a physical advantage: They can be brighter, which makes them better for low-volume areas where environmental lighting is not optimized for reading images, Erickson said.

Running a 2K monitor at the same brightness as a 1K is extremely difficult. To create a bright spot on a monitor, the CRT's electron gun has to "stay" on the phosphor for an extended time or move quickly to rescan that area, according to Orth. Increasing the number of scan lines makes this more difficult.

"You could lower the refresh rate, but this causes flicker," Orth said. "You can increase the thickness of the phosphor, but this decreases the sharpness of the image. Increasing the voltage of the electron gun works, but it decreases the life of the monitor and causes blooming. You begin to see the trade-offs."

Recent Videos
Study: MRI-Based AI Enhances Detection of Seminal Vesicle Invasion in Prostate Cancer
What New Research Reveals About the Impact of AI and DBT Screening: An Interview with Manisha Bahl, MD
Can AI Assessment of Longitudinal MRI Scans Improve Prediction for Pediatric Glioma Recurrence?
A Closer Look at MRI-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy for Monitoring and Treating Glioblastomas
Incorporating CT Colonography into Radiology Practice
What New Research Reveals About Computed Tomography and Radiation-Induced Cancer Risk
What New Interventional Radiology Research Reveals About Treatment for Breast Cancer Liver Metastases
New Mammography Studies Assess Image-Based AI Risk Models and Breast Arterial Calcification Detection
Can Deep Learning Provide a CT-Less Alternative for Attenuation Compensation with SPECT MPI?
Employing AI in Detecting Subdural Hematomas on Head CTs: An Interview with Jeremy Heit, MD, PhD
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.