# Do Cone Beam CT Picture Archiving and Communication Systems Viewer Interfaces Meet the Expectations of Dental Professionals From a Usability Perspective?

## TL;DR

This study evaluates how user-friendly CBCT viewer interfaces are for dental professionals, finding that while tasks can be completed, usability scores are below average and improvements are needed.

## Contribution

The study introduces a usability evaluation framework for CBCT viewer interfaces in dental settings, highlighting design flaws and user feedback.

## Key findings

- All participants completed the task, but perceived usability scores were below industry standards.
- Common issues included difficulty accessing the MPR window and unclear error messages.
- Lower usability scores correlated with less efficient task performance.

## Abstract

Background

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has revolutionized dental and maxillofacial imaging by providing high-resolution 3D visualizations, essential for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning. Despite its clinical advancements, the usability of CBCT viewer interfaces, which play a crucial role in the effective interpretation of imaging data, remains a critical concern.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the usability of a CBCT viewer interface in clinical settings, focusing on the effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction perspectives, to identify potential areas for improvement.

Methods

Twenty-two participants (N=22) were assigned the task of locating the mental foramen in a mandible dataset, selected randomly, using the multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) mode of a CBCT viewer interface on a local network. The task's effectiveness was gauged by the completion rate, while efficiency was measured through the duration of the task, the number of mouse clicks, and the cursor's path in both pixels and meters. Satisfaction or perceived usability was evaluated using the system usability scale (SUS-TR), and computer system usability questionnaire (T-CSUQ), among other scales, with participants also providing open-ended feedback. Demographic characteristics served as classification variables.

Results

All participants completed the given task. No demography-related differences in efficiency were observed. Perceived usability (SUS-TR: 60.68±19.58, T-CSUQ: 43.63±16.34) was below the industry standards, categorizing the system as a detractor. Commonly reported issues included accessing the MPR window, cursor behavior, and unclear error messages. The mean SUS-TR score negatively correlated with efficiency-related variables (p<0.05 for each).

Conclusions

The study's findings indicate that the CBCT viewer interface does not fully meet dental professionals' usability expectations, as evidenced by the task's completion rate, efficiency metrics, and below-average usability scores. Despite the successful task completion by all participants, the identified issues in interface design, such as difficulties in accessing the MPR window and unclear error messages, highlight significant areas for improvement. To enhance user satisfaction and efficiency, future developments of CBCT viewer interfaces should incorporate feedback from end-users and prioritize user-friendly design principles.