Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2025; 16(05): 1595-1605
DOI: 10.1055/a-2721-6170
Research Article

User-Centered Assessment of MRI Equipment Flexibility, Workspace Adequacy, User Interface Usability, and Technical Proficiency

Authors

  • Albert D. Piersson

    1   Department of Diagnostic Radiography, Lord Mayor's Walk, York St John University, School of Science, Technology & Health, England, United Kingdom

  • George Nunoo

    2   Imaging Department, University of Ghana Medical Centre, Accra, Ghana

  • Evans Tettey

    3   Radiology Department, Children's Health Ireland, Temple Street, Ireland

  • Nicholas Otumi

    4   Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, United States
Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives

The effective operation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems relies on physical interactions with complex imaging environments, equipment, and user interfaces (UIs). However, there is limited empirical data evaluating how physical interactions with MRI equipment and accessories, workspace configuration, MRI UI design, and technical proficiency influence clinical workflow.

Methods

In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted among MRI end-users, across public and private health facilities (n = 13), using a structured questionnaire to assess demographics, patient positioning and equipment handling, MRI workspace adequacy, interface usability (guided by Nielsen's heuristics), and self-reported MRI skill proficiency.

Results

The predominant field strength of scanners in current use was 1.5T. General Electric was the most frequently used MRI scanner brand. Most respondents received their MRI training from nonvendor sources—such as academic institutions or peer-based instruction—rather than directly from equipment manufacturers. High ease-of-use ratings were reported for patient positioning and equipment handling tasks. Workspace adequacy was mostly rated as very adequate to highly adequate. Computed Tomography-experienced users showed moderate-to-high proficiency in MRI pulse sequencing and image optimization. However, lower proficiency was noted in quality assurance and physiologic monitoring. Help documentation within the MRI interface received the lowest usability scores. No significant differences in usability or proficiency were found between those trained by vendors versus nonvendors (U = 8.5–15.0; p = 0.376–0.921).

Conclusion

Opportunities exist to enhance clinical workflow and patient throughput by refining error-handling features, improving support documentation, reinforcing ongoing professional development, and re-evaluating training delivery by incorporating iterative, multimedia-based learning modules and regular postinstallation refresher sessions. End-user input in UI design and user feedback analysis should be prioritized to improve system usability and clinical efficiency.

Keywords

graphic user interface - environment - radiology - provider-provider - communications

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible institutional and national research committees, and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study.




Publication History

Received: 15 June 2025

Accepted: 12 October 2025

Article published online:
07 November 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany