Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 2/2018

01-02-2018 | Original Article

Portable abdomen radiography: moving to thickness-based protocols

Authors: Adrian A. Sánchez, Ingrid Reiser, Tina Baxter, Yue Zhang, Joshua H. Finkle, Zheng Feng Lu, Kate A. Feinstein

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 2/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Default pediatric protocols on many digital radiography systems are configured based on patient age. However, age does not adequately characterize patient size, which is the principal determinant of proper imaging technique. Use of default pediatric protocols by inexperienced technologists can result in patient overexposure, inadequate image quality, or repeated examinations.

Objective

To ensure diagnostic image quality at a well-managed patient radiation exposure by transitioning to thickness-based protocols for pediatric portable abdomen radiography.

Materials and methods

We aggregated patient thickness data, milliamperes (mAs), kilovoltage peak (kVp), exposure index (EI), source-to-detector distance, and grid use for all portable abdomen radiographs performed in our pediatric hospital in a database with a combination of automated and manual data collection techniques. We then analyzed the database and used it as the basis to construct thickness-based protocols with consistent image quality across varying patient thicknesses, as determined by the EI.

Results

Retrospective analysis of pediatric portable exams performed at our adult-focused hospitals demonstrated substantial variability in EI relative to our pediatric hospital. Data collection at our pediatric hospital over 4 months accumulated roughly 800 portable abdomen exams, which we used to develop a thickness-based technique chart.

Conclusion

Through automated retrieval of data in our systems’ digital radiography exposure logs and recording of patient abdomen thickness, we successfully developed thickness-based techniques for portable abdomen radiography.
Literature
1.
go back to reference National Research Council (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation (Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, BEIR VII – Phase 2). National Academies Press, Washington, DC National Research Council (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation (Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, BEIR VII – Phase 2). National Academies Press, Washington, DC
2.
go back to reference United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (2014) UNSCEAR 2013 report vol. II: sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation. Scientific annex B: effects of radiation exposure of children. United Nations, New York United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (2014) UNSCEAR 2013 report vol. II: sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation. Scientific annex B: effects of radiation exposure of children. United Nations, New York
3.
go back to reference Don S, MacDougall R, Strauss K et al (2013) Image Gently campaign Back to Basics initiative: ten steps to help manage radiation dose in pediatric digital radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:W431–W436CrossRefPubMed Don S, MacDougall R, Strauss K et al (2013) Image Gently campaign Back to Basics initiative: ten steps to help manage radiation dose in pediatric digital radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:W431–W436CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Willis CE (2004) Strategies for dose reduction in ordinary radiographic examinations using CR and DR. Pediatr Radiol 34:S196–S200CrossRefPubMed Willis CE (2004) Strategies for dose reduction in ordinary radiographic examinations using CR and DR. Pediatr Radiol 34:S196–S200CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Uffmann M, Schaefer-Prokop C (2009) Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose. Eur J Radiol 72:202–208CrossRefPubMed Uffmann M, Schaefer-Prokop C (2009) Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose. Eur J Radiol 72:202–208CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Kleinman PL, Strauss KJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Patient size measured on CT images as a function of age at a tertiary care children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1611–1619CrossRefPubMed Kleinman PL, Strauss KJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Patient size measured on CT images as a function of age at a tertiary care children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1611–1619CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
go back to reference Seibert JA, Morin RL (2011) The standardized exposure index for digital radiography: an opportunity for optimization of radiation dose to the pediatric population. Pediatr Radiol 41:573–581CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Seibert JA, Morin RL (2011) The standardized exposure index for digital radiography: an opportunity for optimization of radiation dose to the pediatric population. Pediatr Radiol 41:573–581CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Moore QT, Don S, Goske MJ et al (2012) Image Gently: using exposure indicators to improve pediatric digital radiography. Radiol Technol 84:93–99PubMed Moore QT, Don S, Goske MJ et al (2012) Image Gently: using exposure indicators to improve pediatric digital radiography. Radiol Technol 84:93–99PubMed
10.
go back to reference Shah C, Jones AK, Willis CE (2008) Consequences of modern anthropometric dimensions for radiographic techniques and patient radiation exposures. Med Phys 35:3616–3625CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shah C, Jones AK, Willis CE (2008) Consequences of modern anthropometric dimensions for radiographic techniques and patient radiation exposures. Med Phys 35:3616–3625CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Zhang M, Liu K, Niu X et al (2013) A method to derive appropriate exposure parameters from target exposure index and patient thickness in pediatric digital radiography. Pediatr Radiol 43:568–574CrossRefPubMed Zhang M, Liu K, Niu X et al (2013) A method to derive appropriate exposure parameters from target exposure index and patient thickness in pediatric digital radiography. Pediatr Radiol 43:568–574CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Cohen MD, Cooper ML, Piersall K et al (2011) Quality assurance: using the exposure index and the deviation index to monitor radiation exposure for portable chest radiographs in neonates. Pediatr Radiol 41:592–601CrossRefPubMed Cohen MD, Cooper ML, Piersall K et al (2011) Quality assurance: using the exposure index and the deviation index to monitor radiation exposure for portable chest radiographs in neonates. Pediatr Radiol 41:592–601CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Cohen MD, Markowitz R, Hill J et al (2012) Quality assurance: a comparison study of radiographic exposure for neonatal chest radiographs at 4 academic hospitals. Pediatr Radiol 42:668–673CrossRefPubMed Cohen MD, Markowitz R, Hill J et al (2012) Quality assurance: a comparison study of radiographic exposure for neonatal chest radiographs at 4 academic hospitals. Pediatr Radiol 42:668–673CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Mothiram U, Brennen PC, Robinson J et al (2013) Retrospective evaluation of exposure index (EI) values from plain radiographs reveals important considerations for quality improvement. J Med Radiat Sci 60:115–122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mothiram U, Brennen PC, Robinson J et al (2013) Retrospective evaluation of exposure index (EI) values from plain radiographs reveals important considerations for quality improvement. J Med Radiat Sci 60:115–122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Yasumatsu S, Tanaka N, Iwase K et al (2016) Effect of X-ray beam quality on determination of exposure index. Radiol Phys Technol 9:109–115CrossRefPubMed Yasumatsu S, Tanaka N, Iwase K et al (2016) Effect of X-ray beam quality on determination of exposure index. Radiol Phys Technol 9:109–115CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Portable abdomen radiography: moving to thickness-based protocols
Authors
Adrian A. Sánchez
Ingrid Reiser
Tina Baxter
Yue Zhang
Joshua H. Finkle
Zheng Feng Lu
Kate A. Feinstein
Publication date
01-02-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-017-4025-4

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Pediatric Radiology 2/2018 Go to the issue