阅片室内环境照度的检测与分析

Test and analysis on illuminance in reading room

目的 参照DIN(多伊奇工业标准 ) 6856等有关国际标准 ,对影响影像诊断质量因素之一的阅片室内环境照度 (IRR)进行检测与分析。方法 采用工业光度学测定方法 ,用风光牌ZF 2型照度计对山东省的省、地 (市 )、县三级医院共 44个阅片室内的IRR进行检测 ,并行统计学处理。结果(1 )各级医院IRR普遍偏高 ,不合格率 (按超过 1 0 0lx计 ) 45.45% ;最严重者竟高达 52 0lx ,超过允许最大值 (1 0 0lx) 5倍多 ;(2 )各级医院间IRR不合格率比较 ,无显著性差异 (χ2 =0 .0 3 87,P >0 .0 5) ,即IRR的状况不因医院级别的升高而有所改善。 (3 )影像科室与非影像科室相比较 ,具有显著性差异(χ2 =4.0 81 3 ,P <0 .0 5) ,即非影像科室的IRR尤其不符合医学影像的诊断阅片条件要求。结论 本检测结果显示 :各级医院的IRR不合格率偏高 ,尤以非影像科室为重 ,不符合现代医学影像的诊断阅片要求 ,难以保证诊断质量 ,亟待解决。

Objective According to the relevant international standard, such as DIN6856, one of the factors that influences the quality of photographic diagnosis ——illuminance in reading room (IRR) was tested and analyzed. Methods Adopting the industrial optics testing method, we made a test on IRR of 44 reading rooms in the hospitals of Shandong province with Illuminance meter of Fengguang ZF 2, and the data were statistically analyzed. Results ( 1)IRR in all grades of hospitals was generally higher, and 45.45% of it was not in keeping with the standard, and the largest value was 520 lx, which was five times as large as the limit value(100 lx). (2)Comparing the unqualified rate of IRR in all grades of hospitals, we could see there was no noticeable difference (χ 2= 0.038 7, P >0.05),that is to say, IRR couldn′t be improved just because the grade of the hospital was higher. (3)Comparing the photographic department with the non photographic one, we could see there was noticeable difference(χ 2=4.081 3, P <0.05), that is to say, IRR in the non photographic department especially did not meet the need of photographic diagnosis. Conclusion The result of the test showed that IRR in all grades of hospitals was not in keeping with the standard, especially the non photographic department. It doesn′t meet the photographic diagnosis demand of modernmedical imaging. It can′t guarantee the diagnosis quality and should be solved at once.