Preferred display size and visual distance for ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation
Abstract
Introduction: In-line positioning of an ultrasound image provides higher success rates and less time to completion for radial arterial cannulation. But preferable size and distance of ultrasound display has not been previously discussed.
Objective: To assess the ideal visual distance and display size when using a smart phone or tablet as the ultrasound image display.
Methods: Four smart phones or tablets were used as ultrasound displays in six different configurations in a simulated radial artery puncture. In a questionnaire, 116 anaesthesiologists working in Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan, were asked which of the six configurations was preferable for radial artery cannulation.
Results: Sixty anaesthesiologists answered the questionnaire. About half (53%) preferred the smaller display (4- or 5.5-inch) fixed at a distance of 30 to 40 cm, and most of the rest (44%) preferred the larger display (7.9- or 9.7-inch) placed posterior to the probe with a visual distance of 45 to 60 cm.
Conclusions: Among the anaesthesiologists, the preferable size and visual distance for ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation varied using a smart phone or tablet for in-line display.
References
Scheer BV, Perel A, Pfeiffer U. Clinical review: Complications and risk factors of peripheral arterial catheters used for haemodynamic monitoring in anaesthesia and intensive care medicine. Crit Care. 2002(6):198-204. doi: http://doi.org/10.1186/cc1489
White L, Halpin A, Turner M, Wallace L. Ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation in adult and paediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2016(116):610-617. doi: http://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew097
Tsuchiya M, Mizutani K, Funai Y, Nakamoto T. In-line position of ultrasound images using wireless remote display system with tablet computer facilitates ultrasound-guided radial artery catheterization. J Clin Monit Comput. 2016(30):101-106. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-015-9692-9
Ichino J, Kanayama H, Tano S, Hashiyama T. Effects of physical display size on text reading. J Image Inform TV Engnr. 2012(53):1570-1580.
Kubota S, Kishimoto K, Goshi S, Imai S, Igarashi Y, Matsumoto T, Haga S, Nakatsue T, Umano Y, Kobayashi Y. Preferred viewing distance for high definition television LCDs. J Inform Process Jpn. 2012(53):1570-1580.
Nohara N, Matsui K, Setta M, Nohara T, Hara N. Comparative study of visual distance while using mobile phones/smartphones and reading books. J of the Eye. 2015(32):163-165.
Bababekova Y, Rosenfield M, Hue JE, Haung RR. Font size and viewing distance of handheld smart phones. Optom Vis Sci. 2011(88):795-797. doi: http://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182198792
Dharma S, Kedev S, Patel T, Rao SV, Bertrand OF, Gilchrist IC. Radial artery diameter does not correlate with body mass index: A duplex ultrasound analysis of 1706 patients undergoing trans-radial catheterization at three experimental radial centers. Int J Cardiol. 2017(228):169-172. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.11.145
Downloads
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
