Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Digital Imaging 1/2012

01-02-2012

Optimization of the Radiological Protection of Patients Undergoing Digital Radiography

Authors: Menglong Zhang, Cunkun Chu

Published in: Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Because of a much higher dynamic range of flat panel detectors, patient dose can vary without change of image quality being perceived by radiologists. This condition makes optimization (OT) of radiation protection undergoing digital radiography (DR) more complex, while a chance to reduced patient dose also exists. In this study, we evaluated the difference of patient radiation and image rejection before and after OT to identify if it is necessary to carry out an OT procedure in a routine task with DR. The study consisted of a measurement of the dose area product (DAP) and entrance surface dose (ESD) received by a reference group of patients for eight common radiographic procedures using the DR system before and after OT. Meanwhile image rejection data during two 2-month periods were collected and sorted according to reason. For every radiographic procedure, t tests showed significant difference in average ESD and DAP before and after OT (p < 0.005). The ESDs from most examinations before OT were three times higher than that after OT. For DAPs, the difference is more significant. Image rejection rate after OT is significantly lower than that before OT (χ 2 = 36.5, p < 0.005). The substantial reductions of dose after OT resulted from appropriate mAs and exposure field. For DR patient dose, less than recommended diagnostic reference level can meet quality criteria and clinic diagnosis.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wouter JHV, Lucia JMK, Jacob G: Dose and perceived image quality in chest radiography. Eur Radiol 72:209–217, 2009CrossRef Wouter JHV, Lucia JMK, Jacob G: Dose and perceived image quality in chest radiography. Eur Radiol 72:209–217, 2009CrossRef
2.
go back to reference International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): Optimization of the radiological protection of patients undergoing radiography, fluoroscopy and computed tomography. Vienna: IAEA, 2004 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): Optimization of the radiological protection of patients undergoing radiography, fluoroscopy and computed tomography. Vienna: IAEA, 2004
3.
go back to reference European Commission: Guidance on diagnostic reference levels for medical exposures. Radiation protection 109. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1999 European Commission: Guidance on diagnostic reference levels for medical exposures. Radiation protection 109. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1999
4.
go back to reference Hart D, Hillier MC, Wall BF: Doses to patients from medical X-ray examinations in the UK 2000 review. Oxford: National Radiological Protection Board Publication, 2002 Hart D, Hillier MC, Wall BF: Doses to patients from medical X-ray examinations in the UK 2000 review. Oxford: National Radiological Protection Board Publication, 2002
5.
go back to reference Gray JE, Archer BR, Butler PF, et al: Reference values for diagnostic radiology: application and impact. Radiology 235:354–358, 2005PubMedCrossRef Gray JE, Archer BR, Butler PF, et al: Reference values for diagnostic radiology: application and impact. Radiology 235:354–358, 2005PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP): Managing patient dose in digital radiology. ICRP Publication 93. Annals of the ICRP 34, No. 1. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 2004 International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP): Managing patient dose in digital radiology. ICRP Publication 93. Annals of the ICRP 34, No. 1. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 2004
7.
go back to reference European Commission: European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images. Report EUR 16260 EN. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1996 European Commission: European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images. Report EUR 16260 EN. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1996
8.
go back to reference John EA, Emerenciana D, Pat D, et al: Optimization of dose and image quality for computed radiography and digital radiography. J Digit Imaging 19:126–131, 2006CrossRef John EA, Emerenciana D, Pat D, et al: Optimization of dose and image quality for computed radiography and digital radiography. J Digit Imaging 19:126–131, 2006CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Jones AK, Polman R, Willis CE, et al.: One year’s results from a server-based system for performing reject analysis and exposure analysis in computed radiography. J Digit Imaging 2009. doi:10.1007/s10278-009-9236-2 Jones AK, Polman R, Willis CE, et al.: One year’s results from a server-based system for performing reject analysis and exposure analysis in computed radiography. J Digit Imaging 2009. doi:10.​1007/​s10278-009-9236-2
10.
go back to reference Cornelia SP, Ulrich N, Henk WV, et al: Digital chest radiography: an update on modern technology, dose containment and control of image quality. Eur Radiol 18:1818–1830, 2008CrossRef Cornelia SP, Ulrich N, Henk WV, et al: Digital chest radiography: an update on modern technology, dose containment and control of image quality. Eur Radiol 18:1818–1830, 2008CrossRef
11.
go back to reference International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP): Radiological protection in medicine. ICRP Publication 105. Annals of the ICRP 37, No. 6. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP): Radiological protection in medicine. ICRP Publication 105. Annals of the ICRP 37, No. 6. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 2007
12.
go back to reference Busch HP: Management of dose and quality in digital radiography. Fortschr Röntgenstr 175:17–19, 2003CrossRef Busch HP: Management of dose and quality in digital radiography. Fortschr Röntgenstr 175:17–19, 2003CrossRef
13.
go back to reference United States Food and Drug Administration: Code of federal regulations, 21CFR900.12(e)(3)(ii), 2008 United States Food and Drug Administration: Code of federal regulations, 21CFR900.12(e)(3)(ii), 2008
14.
go back to reference National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Report 99. Quality assurance for diagnostic imaging. Bethesda: NCRP, 1988 National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Report 99. Quality assurance for diagnostic imaging. Bethesda: NCRP, 1988
15.
go back to reference American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Report 74. Quality control in diagnostic radiology. Madison: Medical Physics, 2002 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Report 74. Quality control in diagnostic radiology. Madison: Medical Physics, 2002
16.
go back to reference American College of Radiology: ACR technical standard for diagnostic medical physics performance monitoring of radiographic and fluoroscopic equipment. Reston: ACR, 2006, pp. 1139–1142 American College of Radiology: ACR technical standard for diagnostic medical physics performance monitoring of radiographic and fluoroscopic equipment. Reston: ACR, 2006, pp. 1139–1142
Metadata
Title
Optimization of the Radiological Protection of Patients Undergoing Digital Radiography
Authors
Menglong Zhang
Cunkun Chu
Publication date
01-02-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 2948-2925
Electronic ISSN: 2948-2933
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-011-9395-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Journal of Digital Imaging 1/2012 Go to the issue