4 ms·

I was looking for mobile x-ray truck services when I came across this article. I do wish by now there was some kind of DIY at-home safe alternative to x-ray wi

by ck2 5y ago

I was looking for mobile x-ray truck services when I came across this article. I do wish by now there was some kind of DIY at-home safe alternative to x-ray with resolution say better than ultrasound, so you could check for fractures in your feet, etc. Guess we have at least another decade for that, requires a leap in technology. But I bet by the end of the century you'll be able to do it on your smartphone or whatever people are using by then. How about some kind of film or sensor that needs minutes of particle exposure from a far lesser powerful source? You would rest your foot or limb on the film or sensor for a minute. There would be a little blur but manageable, maybe corrected digitally?

hef19898 5y ago
We had home-use x-rays in 50s. There is a reason we stopped having those, there are reasons why medical devices are regulated. Promoting home-build stuff is dangerous. Especially since non-trained people just don't know what they are looking at when looking at x-ray pictures.
everforward 5y ago
> How about some kind of film or sensor that needs minutes of particle exposure from a far lesser powerful source? You would rest your foot or limb on the film or sensor for a minute. There would be a little blur but manageable, maybe corrected digitally? I think that blur would be problematic for fractures, at least for the variety where you aren't sure whether you should go to the hospital or not. More generally speaking, even if we had a safe way to get X-rays at home diagnosing them is hard. The "bone is torn in half" ones are easy to see, but I don't think you'd even need an X-ray to diagnose that. The more subtle breaks are hard to pick up on. I googled for fracture X-rays, and on a lot of them I can't tell whether there's a fracture or not unless it's obviously snapped in 2. At home X-rays make less sense to me if you're going to have to have a radiologist look at it anyways. You might as well go to an outpatient imaging place anyways.
- aorloff 5y ago
  American medical industry is worried that once the xray is taken, you can ship it to another country where a trained physician can look at it and diagnose it for $50. The problem is that the American doctor needs to make orders of magnitude more money to diagnose. Hopefully we will see this kind of disintermediation, because for routine stuff (broken bones) costs should be way lower than they are.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >because for routine stuff (broken bones) costs should be way lower than they are. Yeah that tends to happen when insurance gets involved in routine care. Not that the doctors don't deserve some credit.
lbriner 5y ago
The imagery equipment is one thing, the other is the skill to interpret what you see. Sure, a bad fracture might be obvious but there are many very subtle things that are not so easy to see or understand. The radiographer will know the equipment but will usually have to defer to the Doctor for expert advice. Mobile equipment does exist, however it is usually used at smaller hospitals who don't have the space or money for a permanent unit.
- habi 5y ago
  > Mobile equipment does exist, however it is usually used at smaller hospitals who don't have the space or money for a permanent unit. Or used for bed-side imaging for certain patients/issues.
habi 5y ago
> How about some kind of film or sensor that needs minutes of particle exposure from a far lesser powerful source? This makes sense only if the source is powerful enough to penetrate what you want to image. That’s why we’re usin x-rays for this and not visible light. And a much less powerful x-ray source will deposit more energy in the hand/limb of the spectrum that does not penetrate. Hence relatively high-energy radiation delivers good images and minimizes the dose to the patient.

by ck2 5y ago

hef19898 5y ago

We had home-use x-rays in 50s. There is a reason we stopped having those, there are reasons why medical devices are regulated. Promoting home-build stuff is dangerous. Especially since non-trained people just don't know what they are looking at when looking at x-ray pictures.

everforward 5y ago

> How about some kind of film or sensor that needs minutes of particle exposure from a far lesser powerful source? You would rest your foot or limb on the film or sensor for a minute. There would be a little blur but manageable, maybe corrected digitally? I think that blur would be problematic for fractures, at least for the variety where you aren't sure whether you should go to the hospital or not. More generally speaking, even if we had a safe way to get X-rays at home diagnosing them is hard. The "bone is torn in half" ones are easy to see, but I don't think you'd even need an X-ray to diagnose that. The more subtle breaks are hard to pick up on. I googled for fracture X-rays, and on a lot of them I can't tell whether there's a fracture or not unless it's obviously snapped in 2. At home X-rays make less sense to me if you're going to have to have a radiologist look at it anyways. You might as well go to an outpatient imaging place anyways.

aorloff 5y ago
American medical industry is worried that once the xray is taken, you can ship it to another country where a trained physician can look at it and diagnose it for $50. The problem is that the American doctor needs to make orders of magnitude more money to diagnose. Hopefully we will see this kind of disintermediation, because for routine stuff (broken bones) costs should be way lower than they are.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >because for routine stuff (broken bones) costs should be way lower than they are. Yeah that tends to happen when insurance gets involved in routine care. Not that the doctors don't deserve some credit.

lbriner 5y ago

The imagery equipment is one thing, the other is the skill to interpret what you see. Sure, a bad fracture might be obvious but there are many very subtle things that are not so easy to see or understand. The radiographer will know the equipment but will usually have to defer to the Doctor for expert advice. Mobile equipment does exist, however it is usually used at smaller hospitals who don't have the space or money for a permanent unit.

habi 5y ago
> Mobile equipment does exist, however it is usually used at smaller hospitals who don't have the space or money for a permanent unit. Or used for bed-side imaging for certain patients/issues.

habi 5y ago

> How about some kind of film or sensor that needs minutes of particle exposure from a far lesser powerful source? This makes sense only if the source is powerful enough to penetrate what you want to image. That’s why we’re usin x-rays for this and not visible light. And a much less powerful x-ray source will deposit more energy in the hand/limb of the spectrum that does not penetrate. Hence relatively high-energy radiation delivers good images and minimizes the dose to the patient.