Perceived Impact of Digital Imaging Workstations on Radiology Workflow Efficiency and Clinical Decision-Making: A Cross-Sectional Study at Al-Bayda Medical Center, Libya

Abstract

Background: The move from film-based radiology to digital imaging has changed how radiology departments acquire, view, store, and communicate imaging studies. Workstations integrated with Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS), Radiology Information Systems (RIS), and Hospital Information Systems (HIS), and using Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) standards, are now central to routine imaging practice. Their effect in developing healthcare settings depends on more than hardware availability; training, technical support, software reliability, and interoperability may all shape the benefit seen in daily work. Objective: This study examined how healthcare professionals at Al-Bayda Medical Center (AMC), Libya, perceived the effect of digital imaging workstations on workflow efficiency, manual workload, report-related processes, and clinical decision-making. Methods: A single-center cross-sectional survey was conducted among 51 healthcare professionals who routinely interacted with radiological imaging services. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire, supplemented by interviews and direct observation. Categorical variables were summarized using frequencies and percentages. Exploratory associations between selected categorical variables were assessed using Fisher–Freeman–Halton exact tests, with Cramér’s V reported as a measure of association strength. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant for the exploratory inferential analyses. Descriptive findings were interpreted as participants’ reported perceptions and were not considered evidence of objectively demonstrated improvements in workflow or clinical outcomes. Results: Female participants represented 56.9% of the sample and male participants 43.1%. Clinicians represented 62.7% of respondents, radiology technicians 21.6%, and radiologists 15.7%. Nearly half of the participants had more than 10 years of professional experience (47.1%). The Basic PACS viewer was the most commonly reported workstation type (72.5%), followed by multimodality imaging workstations (21.6%). All respondents reported either moderate (54.9%) or slight (45.1%) workflow improvement. Decision-making was perceived to improve significantly by 56.9% of participants and slightly by 43.1%. Manual workload was reported to decrease significantly in 31.4% and slightly in 56.9%, although 11.8% reported increased manual work. The most frequent barriers were lack of training/support (43.1%) and software crashes (41.2%). Professional role was significantly associated with workstation type (p < 0.001, Cramér’s V = 0.568). Conclusion: Participants generally perceived digital imaging workstations as helpful for workflow and clinical decision-making at Al-Bayda Medical Center. Because the study relied mainly on user-reported outcomes, these findings should not be interpreted as direct proof of improved operational performance. Training, stable software, responsive technical support, and stronger interoperability remain practical priorities for improving workstation use.