When healthcare facilities consider upgrading their radiography capabilities, two paths often come up in conversation: choosing a fixed digital radiography system likeDR400i or going with a DR Mobile solution. Both have important roles in modern imaging, yet several misconceptions surround the choice “DR400i instead of DR Mobile.” Clearing them up not only helps radiology decision-makers make informed investments, but also aligns expectations with clinical needs and workflow realities.
Below, we explore common misunderstandings that can influence purchasing decisions and workflow planning.
Misconception 1: DR400i Means Limited Mobility
One belief that persists is that a DR400i system is too static or restrictive compared with DR Mobile units. It is true that mobile systems are designed to travel to the patient rather than moving the patient to the machine, which can be invaluable in emergency rooms, ICU suites, and wards.
However, selecting DR400i instead of DR Mobile does not mean sacrificing flexibility in a fixed imaging environment. The DR400i is a floor-mounted direct radiography system built for general radiology rooms, combining high image quality with motorised adjustments and ergonomic design. Its layout is optimised for consistent workflow, high patient throughput, and can support advanced clinical applications without requiring costly overhead infrastructure upgrades like ceiling rails.
Misconception 2: DR400i Is Only for High-Volume Hospitals
Another common assumption is that DR400i systems are appropriate only for large hospitals with heavy imaging demand. On the contrary, the DR400i is designed as a scalable direct radiography solution that works well for a range of clinical environments, including mid-size diagnostic centres and outpatient clinics.
With features like motorised tube tracking, automatic positioning, and seamless MUSICA image processing, a DR400i installation can streamline workflow even in facilities that handle modest daily exam volumes. In many cases, it can deliver higher consistency and reliability compared to some mobile systems that might perform best in more dynamic areas rather than in the core imaging suite.
Misconception 3: DR Mobile Always Offers Better Overall Value
Because DR Mobile systems are portable and versatile, some stakeholders assume they are automatically the more cost-efficient choice. It’s true that mobile units can reduce patient transfers and support bedside imaging, but value depends on usage context.
For a dedicated imaging room where rapid patient flow, ease of positioning, and stable, repeatable image quality matter most, a DR400i can deliver stronger long-term value. Its fixed setup often means fewer positioning errors, quicker workflow cycles, and lower annual maintenance when compared to frequently moved mobile units. Over time, these efficiencies can translate into measurable operational benefits.
Misconception 4: Choosing DR400i Means Compromising on Technology
Some may think that fixed systems like DR400i lack the latest imaging tech compared to modular DR Mobile options. In reality, the DR400i integrates advanced detector performance and image processing technology, such as MUSICA software that enhances image quality and workflow efficiency. These capabilities are comparable to, and in some cases exceed, those offered by mobile digital radiography systems.
Conclusion
Choosing DR400i insteadof DR Mobile should not be based on misconceptions about mobility, value, or imaging capability. Instead, facilities should evaluate clinical needs, room workflows, and long-term operational goals. When understood correctly, the DR400i offers a dependable, high-quality digital radiography platform that supports consistent imaging performance and enhances patient care.
