Programmable Mouse Design
Programmable Mouse: Quality Improvement Project
Andrew Chen, MD
BACKGROUND
Daily radiology practice centers around 3 devices: the Dictaphone, the keyboard, and the mouse. In our department, these have not changed in the last 15 years, and most PACS computers have the original devices.
Moreover, increasing case volumes and number of images per case contribute to reader fatigue and increase risk for medical errors.
PURPOSE
Identify commercially available devices to increase radiologists’ productivity and reduce reader fatigue as part of a practice quality improvement (PQI) project.
METHODOLOGY
As part of an ongoing project over the past 6 years, more than 20 input devices were purchased to replace the traditional hardware of the keyboard, mouse, and microphone. These devices included 3D mice, wired and wireless mice, tablets and touch pads, and programmable boards produced by companies such as 3Dconnexion®, Logitech®, Razer®, Wacom®, and IBM®.
Essential features for the device
- Compatible with PACS system (Windows platform)
- Commercially available
- Simple to use
- Easily programmable
Products tested
Chosen device | Why Logitech® G700/G700s was chosen |
|
|
Programming
- The mouse was programmed to perform several common tasks.
- A sample of the programmable options is shown in image below.
- Learn how to program the mouse. Download PDF
STUDY DESIGN
Participants
Radiologists from the following divisions:
- Neuroradiology
- Pediatric
- Emergency
- Cardiothoracic
- Abdominal
- MSK
Phases
Phase 1: Safety
- Early adopter participants bought and programmed their own mice
- No safety concerns were identified
Phase 2: Testing
- Participants were assigned 3 tasks using either a traditional mouse or the Logitech mouse:
- Scrolling through an image stack
- Spine labeling
- Switching images
- Tasks were demonstrated to be statistically faster with the Logitech mouse
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Phase 3: Productivity
- Volunteer radiology attendings were evaluated on productivity as measured by RVUs
- RVUs were assessed on 10 separate days before participants were introduced to the new mouse and on 10 days after they had become accustomed to it.
- To reduce bias, volunteers were informed before the study that their productivity would be assessed but the methodology was not disclosed.
- 2 hr blocks were assessed on each of those 10 days for RVU productivity
- The 2 hr block was selected based on maximal productivity during each test day.
- During this block, attendings dictated cases themselves, not through a resident.
- RVUs rose 11-25% per volunteer that successfully learned the mouse
Survey
Volunteers then completed a survey about their experience:
- 100% of subjects would recommend the mouse to others
- 75% of participants think the mouse improved their diagnostic ability.
- 100% would be willing to participate in future hardware trials.
Of note, 5 of 17 attendings failed to incorporate the mouse into their practice and withdrew from the project.
DISCUSSION
Hardware devices utilized in academic radiology practice have minimally improved
|
This study shows that upgrading technology is a simple, low cost way to increase productivity among diagnostic radiologists.
|
Issues raised during the study
|
Study design limitations
|
This pilot shows that for little cost, a commercially available product can significantly increase radiologists’ productivity, reducing fatigue, improving quality, and potentially reducing medical error. |
Trainees are highly encouraged to explore new hardware devices as in this project. We believe this is a practical skill that will inevitably find its place in daily radiology practice. Please email me at Andrew.Chen@umassmemorial.org for comments or questions.
Andrew Chen, MD has no relevant financial or non-financial relationships to disclose.