An assessment of exposure indices in computed radiography for the posterior-anterior chest and the lateral lumbar spine.

Studies have indicated that computed radiography (CR) can increase radiation dose to the patient, leading to potential biological effects. Although manufacturers have set parameters to safeguard against overexposure, it is unclear whether these are being used by radiographers or if their recommended values are consistent with the ALARA principle. The research aims are to investigate (i) whether radiographers are producing images with exposure indices within the manufacturers recommended range (MRR); (ii) the phenomenon of exposure creep, and (iii) the relationship between exposure indices (EIs) and radiation dose. A retrospective analysis of exposure indices over an 18-month period for the posteroanterior (PA) chest and lateral (LAT) lumbar spine at two centres using Kodak 800 and 850 CR systems was conducted. A phantom study was performed to assess the relationship between EI and entrance surface dose (ESD) for fixed and varying tube potentials. Kodak recommends that images have EIs between 1700 and 1900. Thirty percent of LAT lumbar spine examinations at hospital B and 38% of PA chest examinations at hospital A were produced with EIs below 1700. In the phantom study, when using a varied tube potential (70-125 kVp) and maintaining a constant EI of 1550, ESD was reduced by 56%. All clinical and phantom images were assessed to be of a diagnostic quality. The retrospective results indicate that there is a potential to reduce the MRR and optimize patient dose. There is also evidence to suggest that EI is not a reliable indicator of patient dose. The authors recommend that staff training is essential on these newer systems.

[1]  P S Rezentes,et al.  The relationship between pixel value and beam quality in photostimulable phosphor imaging. , 1997, Medical physics.

[2]  Charles E. Willis,et al.  Computed radiography: a higher dose? , 2002, Pediatric Radiology.

[3]  L. Anderson,et al.  Functional fitting of interstitial brachytherapy dosimetry data recommended by the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 43. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. , 1999, Medical physics.

[4]  Z. F. Lu,et al.  Comparison of computed radiography and film/screen combination using a contrast‐detail phantom , 2003, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[5]  E. Ritenour,et al.  Radiation Protection in Medical Radiography , 1993 .

[6]  W Huda,et al.  Relative speeds of Kodak computed radiography phosphors and screen-film systems. , 1997, Medical physics.

[7]  C E Ravin,et al.  Digital chest radiography with photostimulable storage phosphors: signal-to-noise ratio as a function of kilovoltage with matched exposure risk. , 1993, Radiology.

[8]  C J Martin,et al.  Balancing patient dose and image quality. , 1999, Applied radiation and isotopes : including data, instrumentation and methods for use in agriculture, industry and medicine.

[9]  Patrick C. Brennan,et al.  Digital radiography: are the manufacturers' settings too high? Optimisation of the Kodak digital radiography system with aid of the computed radiography dose index , 2002, European Radiology.

[10]  Jack Valentin,et al.  Managing patient dose in digital radiology , 2004 .

[11]  J T Dobbins,et al.  Performance characteristics of a Kodak computed radiography system. , 1999, Medical physics.

[12]  G C Weatherburn,et al.  A comparison of image reject rates when using film, hard copy computed radiography and soft copy images on picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) workstations. , 1999, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  M Souto,et al.  Scatter in computed radiography. , 1993, Radiology.

[14]  J. Bushberg.  The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging , 2001 .

[15]  J. Ravenel.  The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging, 2nd ed. , 2003 .

[16]  J. Davies,et al.  Comparison of doses for bedside examinations of the chest with conventional screen-film and computed radiography: results of a randomized controlled trial. , 2000, Radiology.