• Andrew S Liteplo, Vicki E Noble, and Ben H C Attwood.
• Division of Emergency Ultrasound, Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114 USA. aliteplo@partners.org
• J Ultrasound Med. 2011 Nov 1; 30 (11): 1459-66.

ObjectivesAs the use of point-of-care sonography spreads, so too does the need for remote expert over-reading via telesonogrpahy. We sought to assess the feasibility of using familiar, widespread, and cost-effective existent technology to allow remote over-reading of sonograms in real time and to compare 4 different methods of transmission and communication for both the feasibility of transmission and image quality.MethodsSonographic video clips were transmitted using 2 different connections (WiFi and 3G) and via 2 different videoconferencing modalities (iChat [Apple Inc, Cupertino, CA] and Skype [Skype Software Sàrl, Luxembourg]), for a total of 4 different permutations. The clips were received at a remote location and recorded and then scored by expert reviewers for image quality, resolution, and detail.ResultsWireless transmission of sonographic clips was feasible in all cases when WiFi was used and when Skype was used over a 3G connection. Images transmitted via a WiFi connection were statistically superior to those transmitted via 3G in all parameters of quality (average P = .031), and those sent by iChat were superior to those sent by Skype but not statistically so (average P = .057).ConclusionsWireless transmission of sonographic video clips using inexpensive hardware, free videoconferencing software, and domestic Internet networks is feasible with retention of image quality sufficient for interpretation. WiFi transmission results in greater image quality than transmission by a 3G network.

13 keywords...

hide…