Radiation Exposure and Image Quality in X-Ray Diagnostic Radiology

Aichinger, Horst; Dierker, Joachim; Joite-Barfuß, Sigrid; Säbel, Manfred

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11241-6

Cited by 63 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With the DigitalDiagnost system the automatic exposure device (AED) can remain in position when the grid is removed, thus allowing for phototimed exposures to be made with grid in or out. 20 If AEDs are being used, and because these are positioned on the detector side of the grid, 21 proper calibration and operation need to be confirmed. 22 It is also possible that radiographers were using adjustments when using the AEC, which could account for the EI values seen here.…”

Section: Manufacturer/examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective evaluation of exposure index (EI) values from plain radiographs reveals important considerations for quality improvement

Mothiram

Brennan

Robinson

et al. 2013

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionFollowing X-ray exposure, radiographers receive immediate feedback on detector exposure in the form of the exposure index (EI).PurposeTo identify whether radiographers are meeting manufacturer-recommended EI (MREI) ranges for routine chest, abdomen and pelvis X-ray examinations under a variety of conditions and to examine factors affecting the EI.MethodsData on 5000 adult X-ray examinations including the following variables were collected: examination parameters, EI values, patient gender, date of birth, date and time of examination, grid usage and the presence of implant or prosthesis. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize each data set and the Mann–Whitney U test was used to determine significant differences, with P < 0.05 indicating significance for all tests.ResultsMost examinations demonstrated EI values that were outside the MREI ranges, with significantly higher median EI values recorded for female patient radiographs than those for male patients for all manufacturers, indicating higher detector exposures for all units except for Philips digital radiography (DR), where increased EI values indicate lower exposure (P = 0.01). Median EI values for out of hours radiography were also significantly higher compared with normal working hours for all technologies (P ≤ 0.02). Significantly higher median EI values were demonstrated for Philips DR chest X-rays without as compared to those with the employment of a grid (P = 0.03), while significantly lower median EI values were recorded for Carestream Health computed radiography (CR) chest X-rays when an implant or prosthesis was present (P = 0.02).ConclusionsNon-adherence to MREIs has been demonstrated with EI value discrepancies being dependent on patient gender, time/day of exposure, grid usage and the presence of an implant or prosthesis. Retrospective evaluation of EI databases is a valuable tool to assess the need of quality improvement in routine DR.

show abstract

Section: Manufacturer/examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective evaluation of exposure index (EI) values from plain radiographs reveals important considerations for quality improvement

Mothiram

Brennan

Robinson

et al. 2013

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One reason is that the CNRD of soft tissue, when modeled as density difference, suffers significantly when going to lower tube voltages, 13 another that low tube voltages are not adequate for large patients due to the power limitations of current x-ray tubes and the fact that the efficiency, i.e., the ratio of input electrical energy and output photon energy, of these tubes is roughly proportional to the tube voltage. 24 For large patients, low tube voltages would thus lead to undesirable long scan times. The values in Table V used for the comparisons to iodine thus represent a trade-off used in clinical practice between overall image quality, minimum dose and total scan time.…”

Section: Iid Evaluation Of Cnrd and Dose Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential of high‐Z contrast agents in clinical contrast‐enhanced computed tomography

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of this study encourage the development and use of CM based on high-Z materials, especially for adipose patients, where high tube voltages are necessary to reach sufficiently short scan times. Hafnium proved to be the best compromise for average-size and for adipose patients. Even higher-Z materials such as gold and bismuth showed a good overall performance in conjunction with high tube voltage, large patients or strong added filtration and may be recommended for scans under these conditions.

show abstract

“…High noise level images increase the risk of diagnostic details loss. 24 Lowering the kVp is essential to increase x-ray attenuation and consequently the contrast resolution of structures is improved. Lower voltage increases DQE of the detectors of digital system.…”

Section: Software Artefactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality parameters and assessment methods of digital radiography images

Alsleem

Davidson

2012

Radiographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the parameters that characterise the image quality of digital radiography and the available evaluation methods that are used to measure these parameters. The article also discusses the factors that affect each parameter of image quality. Digital imaging systems are the most commonly utilised technology in the field of radiology. Screen‐film radiography systems are almost replaced by digital radiography. The data acquisition and image processing principles of digital radiography differ from that of conventional radiography. The required exposure factors for each digital radiography system are not the same. Therefore, the image quality should be optimised while lower radiation dose is maintained according to the properties of the specific imaging system. Distinguishing image quality parameters and understanding the factors that control each image quality parameter are essential to optimise and maintain image quality and to reduce radiation dose to the patient. The degree of factors effects on the images of different digital radiography types and systems are not exactly same. There are different methods and approaches that are used to evaluate the quality of medical images and to assess the performance of imaging systems and each has its own rewards and limits. Therefore, these methods should be utilised and employed according to their aptitudes to improve imaging process.

show abstract

Radiation Exposure and Image Quality in X-Ray Diagnostic Radiology

Cited by 63 publications

References 0 publications

Retrospective evaluation of exposure index (EI) values from plain radiographs reveals important considerations for quality improvement

Retrospective evaluation of exposure index (EI) values from plain radiographs reveals important considerations for quality improvement

Potential of high‐Z contrast agents in clinical contrast‐enhanced computed tomography

Quality parameters and assessment methods of digital radiography images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About