Evidence Hub

Low-bandwidth tele-ultrasound

Brebner JA, Ruddick-Bracken H, Brebner EM, Gilbert FJ, Maclean JR, Ritchie LD, Smith P, Thompson A

Journal of telemedicine and telecare, 1999

Abstract

We examined the acceptability and diagnostic accuracy of dynamic ultrasound images transmitted at 128 kbit/s and 384 kbit/s. The gold standard was the direct recording of 200 ultrasound examinations on video-tape. The taped images were later transmitted at both 128 kbit/s and 384 kbit/s and recorded, resulting in three tapes for each case. Four observers viewed each tape individually. Ninety per cent of images transmitted at 384 kbit/s were rated as diagnostically acceptable compared with 32% of images transmitted at 128 kbit/s. Diagnostic agreement between tapes transmitted at 384 kbit/s and the gold standard was 85%, compared with 78% for 128 kbit/s transmissions. Observers were not satisfied with low-bandwidth transmission of ultrasound images despite adequate diagnostic accuracy. Dynamic ultrasound images transmitted at 384 kbit/s were viewed as both diagnostically acceptable and accurate.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free