Isn high field always the better way to image?
Images from high field scanners include a lot of detail and can cover a larger region in a single scan. However this does not necessarily make for a better diagnosis, in much the same way as a veterinarian may choose to use a smaller x-ray or ultrasound machine in circumstances where it is diagnostically appropriate, even if a more powerful machine would give a higher quality image. The resolution of the Hallmarq scanner is typically 0.8mm x 0.8mm in-plane for most scans which allows for the visualisation of fine structures, and many horse owners prefer the lower cost and the ability to scan the horse without general anesthesia. However if an even higher resolution image should be required one can be obtained by increasing the time taken to collect the signal, under general anesthesia if the veterinarian should consider it necessary Low field scanners, including the Hallmarq system, require continuous air conditioning with close temperature control to maintain a stable environment.
Related Questions
- I am using the option to Automatically Detect the Presence of Handwriting for my Image field. Why isn Remark Office OMR picking up all of my handwritten comments?
- Does student teaching in a high need field for a low-income school count towards my time commitment in my agreement to serve?
- Isn high field always the better way to image?
