TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation criteria for mobile X-ray devices – a novel benchmark based on literature review and lead user interviews in trauma surgery and orthopaedics
AU - Barth, Tobias
AU - Bretin, Annette
AU - Behrends, Lina
AU - Münch, Matthias
AU - Wendlandt, Robert
AU - Schulz, Arndt Peter
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.
PY - 2026/2/1
Y1 - 2026/2/1
N2 - Objectives: The study aims on evaluation criteria applicable for the development process of new mobile 3D X-ray imaging devices, based on existent knowledge from literature and user expertise. Methods: For this purpose, a structured literature review was performed to outline limitations and opportunities of established systems on the market. Additionally, medical professionals from various medical fields were interviewed, following a structured interview protocol, to identify critical evaluation aspects from a user perspective. Results: The study identified a total of 52 evaluation criteria, which were categorized into the following domains: clinical application and manageability, image quality, radiation dose and risk of infection. The analysis of user needs, subsequent summarization, and rating of these needs will serve as a new benchmark for the evaluation of both existing and new devices. This will provide guidance to procurement, medical experts, and manufacturers. Conclusions: While the structured evaluation of mobile X-ray devices is possible, consultation of the users regarding their weighting of varying needs will remain an important aspect of the process. The evaluation items can serve as a starting point for this analysis.
AB - Objectives: The study aims on evaluation criteria applicable for the development process of new mobile 3D X-ray imaging devices, based on existent knowledge from literature and user expertise. Methods: For this purpose, a structured literature review was performed to outline limitations and opportunities of established systems on the market. Additionally, medical professionals from various medical fields were interviewed, following a structured interview protocol, to identify critical evaluation aspects from a user perspective. Results: The study identified a total of 52 evaluation criteria, which were categorized into the following domains: clinical application and manageability, image quality, radiation dose and risk of infection. The analysis of user needs, subsequent summarization, and rating of these needs will serve as a new benchmark for the evaluation of both existing and new devices. This will provide guidance to procurement, medical experts, and manufacturers. Conclusions: While the structured evaluation of mobile X-ray devices is possible, consultation of the users regarding their weighting of varying needs will remain an important aspect of the process. The evaluation items can serve as a starting point for this analysis.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105029323703
U2 - 10.1515/bmt-2025-0086
DO - 10.1515/bmt-2025-0086
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 41626674
AN - SCOPUS:105029323703
SN - 0013-5585
VL - 71
SP - 39
EP - 51
JO - Biomedizinische Technik
JF - Biomedizinische Technik
IS - 1
ER -