digital vs manual radiography

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Celine — Sat, 21 Sep 2013 17:54:31 GMT

Just switched to digital a few months ago and NOW I'm really impressed with it, but initially had a few teething problems. We always used to use mammography film for almost everything - gives a lot finer detail which is important when dealing with a bird that weighs 43g, etc.

With our initial digital setup on loan the quality of image we were getting was just nowhere near the quality of the mammo film. Once we voiced our concerns to the supplier they came and tweaked algorythms (yeah, I've no idea either...) and that was marginally better, but now they've changed the unit entirely to their mammo-equivalent unit, and I have to admit the images we are getting now are pretty good. The company are even going to give us their absolute latest-out-of-development-still-under-wraps software/hardware since a visit last week from their MD.

I guess the key is to be quite demanding with your requirements and trial a few different units (we had two brands on loan side by side and repeating the same views/exposures on each for a few weeks to help us decide) and generally remember that it's a massive outlay of money and you can use it to demand the very best deal from the supplier, and the package should be tailored directly to your specific needs!

Re: digital vs manual radiography

SuzyM — Sat, 21 Sep 2013 15:06:50 GMT

Just print them out - we use digital and have the ability print the images onto 'traditional'-looking film. We often do this to take the image to the surgeon in theatre (quicker than the current PACS system!) or to give to a client or farrier if it's easier than using digital methods.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Nick Shackleton — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 21:21:21 GMT

Old school vets and technology lol. They also liked to feel an actual rad in their hand lol

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Teh Fluffeh — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 21:07:52 GMT

[quote user="Nick Shackleton"] Also I used to work with orthopaedic surgeons when I was in veterinary industry and many of them wanted to be able to mark up radiographs prior to performing surgery obviously these marks can not be applied to digital copies.

[/quote]

Why not? I also work with Orthopaedic surgeons and they often make digital calculations and draw lines and whatever necessary on the digital xray. There's a toolbar which allows enables notes and drawings contained on all digital systems I've used.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Julie-Anne Wilson — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 20:58:05 GMT

Digital, hands down. So much quicker, no waste when you're foutering about trying to get the perfect position, shorter anaesthetics and also great for the quick conscious xrays of shock/dyspnoeic patients. Also, no smell from the chemicals and no nasty taste in the back in your throat when you're stuck in a room with said chemicals.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Nick Shackleton — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 19:53:09 GMT

I now work in human radiography were CR has been used for many years. I do see the advantages of it. However, there are a few downsides that I can see. The outlay to purchasing expensive equipment and having a reliable PACS system. Also vets may want radiographs available in theatre, so means the cost of having viewing equipment installed. Also I used to work with orthopaedic surgeons when I was in veterinary industry and many of them wanted to be able to mark up radiographs prior to performing surgery obviously these marks can not be applied to digital copies. I do prefer CR and now with the move over DR it's even better. Provided you have a decent PACS system making images available in any part of the veterinary practice. Easy for storage of images. No bulky shelving required for storing films. No need to have a separate dark room. Images can easily be transferred to CD so they can be sent for referral or second opinion. CR & DR have taken away the art form of producing a radiograph. Having said this I do prefer CR & DR

Re: digital vs manual radiography

chris beasley — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:30:02 GMT

Have been digital for over a year now. Much better by far. No waiting to see if the HD x ray is good enough! Much shorter ga s too.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Ems — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:31:09 GMT

I much prefer digital radiography, as Sarah mentioned, having no chemicals to deal with is a huge plus. I used to hate having to change the chemicals!

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Sally Seddon — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 14:41:57 GMT

We changed over to digital a few months ago. It's brilliant. No nasty chemicals and a much faster clearer image.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Katherine Spear — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 14:14:04 GMT

Id vote for digital all the way, no contest really. So much quicker so shorter GA is probably the main advantage but there are loads.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

ereveley — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 13:25:37 GMT

Definately prefer digital, much quicker and easier. Great not having to handle chemicals.

Re: digital vs manual radiography

Sarah Cahill — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 13:13:13 GMT

I MUCH prefer digital, far easier, no nasty chemicals to warm up or deal with, better for the environment too as no disposal of said chemicals required. Referring back to old radiographs is far simpler as stored on computer, not in a box - our old films could often be stuck together, crimped or stained if not washed properly. Also easier to send radiographs for second opinion/referral via email rather than having to post and have the receiving practice send back! I could go on and on I think! Definitely a digital convert!

One good thing about manual processing though would be understanding the science behind the formation of the image and the stages of processing, new students who are starting with digital won't have that experience.