Advertisement

A Cross-Cultural User Evaluation of the Prototype Extremity MRI

  • Kimin Ban
  • Eui S. JungEmail author
  • Kibum Park
  • Dasol Kwon
  • Jinsang Park
  • Jinho Yim
  • Kyungjin Oh
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 818)

Abstract

The proposed ergonomic design guidelines for the new extremity MRI led to the development of a prototype MRI. A cross-cultural user evaluation was conducted to guarantee the adequacy of the prototype for both Korean and Caucasian populations from 5th percentile female to over 95th percentile male potential patients. First, a scenario of MRI usage was defined from the chair setting, patient seating, scanning, and the egress of a patient. The user evaluation was done to measure participants’ local and whole body discomfort for the combinations of scanning types and durations, specifically focusing on the ingress and egress of the participant and the whole duration of scanning. The statistical analyses revealed that no significant change in discomfort was observed up to 40 min of scanning duration. Since no electrical adjustments can be implemented due to magnetic interferences, it is noted that existing mechanical adjustments caused local discomfort to certain extreme population of patients in specific body postures. Thus, a set of modifications of the design was suggested in terms of supplementary supporters.

Keywords

Extremity MRI Cross-cultural user evaluation Anthropometry 

References

  1. 1.
    Martin JL, Clark DJ, Morgan SP, Crowe JA, Murphy E (2012) A user-centred approach to requirements elicitation in medical device development: a case study from an industry perspective. Appl Ergon 43(1):184–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mival O, Benyon D (2015) User experience (UX) design for medical personnel and patients. In: Requirements Engineering for Digital Health, pp 117–131. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steinberg EP (1986) The status of MRI in 1986: rates of adoption in the United States and worldwide. Am J Roentgenol 147(3):453–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brydie A, Raby N (2003) Early MRI in the management of clinical scaphoid fracture. Br J Radiol 76(905):296–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roemer FW, Lynch JA, Niu J, Zhang Y, Crema MD, Tolstykh I, El-Khoury GY, Felson DT, Lewis CE, Nevitt MC, Guermazi A (2010) A comparison of dedicated 1.0 T extremity MRI vs large-bore 1.5 T MRI for semiquantitative whole organ assessment of osteoarthritis: the MOST study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 18(2):168–174Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Health Services Research (HSR) (2013) Extremity-only MRI. Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE), BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brooks S, Cicuttini FM, Lim S, Taylor D, Stuckey SL, Wluka AE (2005) Cost effectiveness of adding magnetic resonance imaging to the usual management of suspected scaphoid fractures. Br J Sports Med 39(2):75–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Callaghan S, Trapp M (1998) Evaluating two dressings for the prevention of nasal bridge pressure sores. Prof Nurse (London, England) 13(6):361–364Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jung ES, Ban KM, Kim JY, Na SK, Ahn JW, Yim JH (2018) An ergonomic user interface design for a new extremity MRI focusing on the patient chair. In: International ergonomics association 20th congressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimin Ban
    • 1
  • Eui S. Jung
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kibum Park
    • 1
  • Dasol Kwon
    • 1
  • Jinsang Park
    • 1
  • Jinho Yim
    • 2
  • Kyungjin Oh
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Industrial and Management EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Samsung ElectronicsYeongtong, SuwonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations