Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy of new interfaces for intra-procedural imaging review: the Microsoft Kinect, Hillcrest Labs Loop Pointer, and the Apple iPad.

ABSTRACT: We adapted and evaluated the Microsoft Kinect (touchless interface), Hillcrest Labs Loop Pointer (gyroscopic mouse), and the Apple iPad (multi-touch tablet) for intra-procedural imaging review efficacy in a simulation using MIM Software DICOM viewers. Using each device, 29 radiologists executed five basic interactions to complete the overall task of measuring an 8.1-cm hepatic lesion: scroll, window, zoom, pan, and measure. For each interaction, participants assessed the devices on a 3-point subjective scale (3?=?highest usability score). The five individual scores were summed to calculate a subjective composite usability score (max 15 points). Overall task time to completion was recorded. Each user also assessed each device for its potential to jeopardize a sterile field. The composite usability scores were as follows: Kinect 9.9 (out of 15.0; SD?=?2.8), Loop Pointer 12.9 (SD?=?13.5), and iPad 13.5 (SD?=?1.8). Mean task completion times were as follows: Kinect 156.7 s (SD?=?86.5), Loop Pointer 51.5 s (SD?=?30.6), and iPad 41.1 s (SD?=?25.3). The mean hepatic lesion measurements were as follows: Kinect was 7.3 cm (SD?=?0.9), Loop Pointer 7.8 cm (SD?=?1.1), and iPad 8.2 cm (SD?=?1.2). The mean deviations from true hepatic lesion measurement were as follows: Kinect 1.0 cm and for both the Loop Pointer and iPad, 0.9 cm (SD?=?0.7). The Kinect had the least and iPad had the most subjective concern for compromising the sterile field. A new intra-operative imaging review interface may be near. Most surveyed foresee these devices as useful in procedures, and most do not anticipate problems with a sterile field. An ideal device would combine iPad's usability and accuracy with the Kinect's touchless aspect.

SUBMITTER: Chao C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4090412 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative efficacy of new interfaces for intra-procedural imaging review: the Microsoft Kinect, Hillcrest Labs Loop Pointer, and the Apple iPad.

Chao Cherng C Tan Justin J Castillo Edward M EM Zawaideh Mazen M Roberts Anne C AC Kinney Thomas B TB

Journal of digital imaging 20140801 4

We adapted and evaluated the Microsoft Kinect (touchless interface), Hillcrest Labs Loop Pointer (gyroscopic mouse), and the Apple iPad (multi-touch tablet) for intra-procedural imaging review efficacy in a simulation using MIM Software DICOM viewers. Using each device, 29 radiologists executed five basic interactions to complete the overall task of measuring an 8.1-cm hepatic lesion: scroll, window, zoom, pan, and measure. For each interaction, participants assessed the devices on a 3-point sub ...[more]

PMID: 24706159

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOne of the major challenges in mental medical care is finding out new instruments for an accurate and objective evaluation of the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Early ADHD identification, severity assessment, and prompt treatment are essential to avoid the negative effects associated with this mental condition.ObjectiveThe aim of our study was to develop a novel ADHD assessment instrument based on Microsoft Kinect, which identifies ADHD cardinal symptoms in order to provide a more accurate evaluation.MethodsA group of 30 children, aged 8-12 years (10.3 [SD 1.4]; male 70% [21/30]), who were referred to the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Unit of the Department of Psychiatry at Fundación Jiménez Díaz Hospital (Madrid, Spain), were included in this study. Children were required to meet the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria of ADHD diagnosis. One of the parents or guardians of the children filled the Spanish version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behavior (SWAN) rating scale used in clinical practice. Each child conducted a Kinect-based continuous performance test (CPT) in which the reaction time (RT), the commission errors, and the time required to complete the reaction (CT) were calculated. The correlations of the 3 predictors, obtained using Kinect methodology, with respect to the scores of the SWAN scale were calculated.ResultsThe RT achieved a correlation of -.11, -.29, and -.37 with respect to the inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity factors of the SWAN scale. The correlations of the commission error with respect to these 3 factors were -.03, .01, and .24, respectively.ConclusionsOur findings show a relation between the Microsoft Kinect-based version of the CPT and ADHD symptomatology assessed through parental report. Results point out the importance of future research on the development of objective measures for the diagnosis of ADHD among children and adolescents.

Project description:Quantitative assessment of motor function is increasingly applied in fall risk stratification, diagnosis, and disease monitoring of neuro-geriatric disorders of balance and gait. Its broad application, however, demands for low-cost and easy to use solutions that facilitate high-quality assessment outside laboratory settings. In this study, we validated in 30 healthy adults (12 female, age: 32.5 [22 - 62] years) the performance and accuracy of the latest generation of the Microsoft RGB-D camera, i.e., Azure Kinect (AK), in tracking body motion and providing estimates of clinical measures that characterise static posture, postural transitions, and locomotor function. The accuracy and repeatability of AK recordings was validated with a clinical reference standard multi-camera motion capture system (Qualisys) and compared to its predecessor Kinect version 2 (K2). Motion signal quality was evaluated by Pearson's correlation and signal-to-noise ratios while the accuracy of estimated clinical parameters was described by absolute and relative agreement based on intraclass correlation coefficients. The accuracy of AK-based body motion signals was moderate to excellent (RMSE 89 to 20 mm) and depended on the dimension of motion (highest for anterior-posterior dimension), the body region (highest for wrists and elbows, lowest for ankles and feet), and the specific motor task (highest for stand up and sit down, lowest for quiet standing). Most derived clinical parameters showed good to excellent accuracy (r .84 to .99) and repeatability (ICC(1,1) .55 to .94). The overall performance and limitations of body tracking by AK were comparable to its predecessor K2 in a cohort of young healthy adults. The observed accuracy and repeatability of AK-based evaluation of motor function indicate the potential for a broad application of high-quality and long-term monitoring of balance and gait in different non-specialised environments such as medical practices, nursing homes or community centres.

Project description:BackgroundComputer based gaming systems, such as the Microsoft Kinect (Kinect), can facilitate complex task practice, enhance sensory feedback and action observation in novel, relevant and motivating modes of exercise which can be difficult to achieve with standard physiotherapy for people with Parkinson's disease (PD). However, there is a current need for safe, feasible and effective exercise games that are appropriate for PD rehabilitation. The aims of this study were to i) develop a computer game to rehabilitate dynamic postural control for people with PD using the Kinect; and ii) pilot test the game's safety and feasibility in a group of people with PD.MethodsA rehabilitation game aimed at training dynamic postural control was developed through an iterative process with input from a design workshop of people with PD. The game trains dynamic postural control through multi-directional reaching and stepping tasks, with increasing complexity across 12 levels of difficulty. Nine people with PD pilot tested the game for one session. Participant feedback to identify issues relating to safety and feasibility were collected using semi-structured interviews.ResultsParticipants reported that they felt safe whilst playing the game. In addition, there were no adverse events whilst playing. In general, the participants stated that they enjoyed the game and seven of the nine participants said they could imagine themselves using the game at home, especially if they felt it would improve their balance. The Flow State Scale indicated participants were immersed in the gameplay and enjoyed the experience. However, some participants reported that they found it difficult to discriminate between different types and orientations of visual objects in the game and some also had difficulty with the stepping tasks, especially when performed at the same time as the reaching tasks.ConclusionComputer-based rehabilitation games using the Kinect are safe and feasible for people with PD although intervention trials are needed to test their safety, feasibility and efficacy in the home.

Project description:SignificanceThere are no data available comparing the iPad as a portable magnification device with a portable video magnifier. Our study supports the use and integration of mainstream tablet computers into vision rehabilitation to overcome potential barriers to device uptake due to the stigma attached to traditional devices.PurposePortable personal tablet computers have taken on an important role as assistive devices for individuals with visual impairment; however, their use is rarely supported by independent data. Our study aims to contribute to evidence-based practice by comparing a tablet computer with a portable video magnifier in their use as spot-reading devices.MethodsWe compared the Optelec Compact 5 HD portable video magnifier (Optelec, Longueuil, Canada) and the Apple iPad Air tablet computer (Apple Inc, Cupertino, CA) using the SuperVision+ Magnifier app by asking 60 adults with low vision (age range, 19 to 97 years; mean visual acuity, 20/136) to spot read information on a bill, a medication box, and a food label. Their ability to complete each task was timed; they completed the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology questionnaire and indicated their preferred device.ResultsPerformance speed indicated that easier tasks were completed faster; however, there were no statistically significant differences in performance between the two device conditions. The highest satisfaction scores for both devices were identical: dimensions, ease of use, and effectiveness. Preference between the two devices was split at 25 for iPad, 33 for the portable closed-circuit television, and 2 for undecided.ConclusionsThe results indicate that performance speed on our spot-reading tasks was comparable across the two devices. In addition, subjective judgment of the device features and personal preferences lead us to conclude that both the iPad and the portable magnifier may have certain equivalence in their functionality, depending on the user and the task for which they are used.

Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy of new interfaces for intra-procedural imaging review: the Microsoft Kinect, Hillcrest Labs Loop Pointer, and the Apple iPad.

Publications

Comparative efficacy of new interfaces for intra-procedural imaging review: the Microsoft Kinect, Hillcrest Labs Loop Pointer, and the Apple iPad.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets