Need for an image quality assurance program in clinical teleradiology

1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Telepak ◽  
Charles A. Kelsey
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Image Quality ◽  
Quality Assurance Program

A quality assurance program for image quality of cone-beam CT guidance in radiation therapy

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 1807-1815 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Bissonnette ◽  
Douglas J. Moseley ◽  
David A. Jaffray
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Image Quality ◽  
Cone Beam Ct ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Ct Guidance ◽  
Quality Assurance Program

scholarly journals Peer Review Tool for General Radiography Technologists Improves Image Quality

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew M. Hsiao ◽  
Annemarie Budau-Bymoen ◽  
Petar Seslija ◽  
Charlotte J. Yong-Hing ◽  
Yogesh Thakur
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Image Quality ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Regional Analysis ◽  
Quality Criterion ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Imaging Department

Purpose: Quality improvement is vital to ensure health-care providers meet optimal patient care standards. Within our jurisdiction, accreditation requires image peer review as part of the quality assurance program. We propose a method to improve quality assurance in radiography by implementing a novel software-based peer review system for radiography technologists. Methods: This is a retrospective study. A peer review tool was developed in Microsoft Excel and Visual Basic. The tool has 14 image quality criteria, which were selected based on national and international criteria, each containing standardized answers ensuring a common scoring regime. The tool provides data analysis and storage of all peer reviews performed. Radiography supervisors utilized the tool to evaluate image quality of various body parts at 28 hospitals. The tool enabled each Medical Imaging Department to objectively score images at their own hospital. Approximately 2% of all radiographs were randomly chosen for peer review. Additionally, the tool allowed for regional analysis based on hospital, body part, and quality criterion. Results: Initial findings exposed equipment-related issues such as worn imaging plates, artifacts, and poor exposures, which prompted increased preventative maintenance. Other documented issues included foreign objects, inadequate collimation and centering, and inconsistent usage of lead markers. After identifying quality assurance-related issues, hospitals implemented education, resulting in improved overall image quality scores in subsequent audits. Conclusion: The peer review tool helped identify and correct various issues affecting image quality and ensures our program meets required accreditation standards. Furthermore, staff found utilizing the tool to identify areas for improvement improved collaboration, ongoing education, and support between staff.

scholarly journals Radiation Protection Evaluations Following the Installations of Two Cardiovascular Digital X-ray Fluoroscopy Systems

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (20) ◽  
pp. 9749
Author(s):  
Ibrahim I. Suliman ◽  
Abdelmoneim Sulieman ◽  
Essam Mattar
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Image Quality ◽  
Image Intensifier ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Acceptance Testing ◽  
Continuous Mode ◽  
Flat Panel ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Air Kerma ◽  
Pulsed Mode

Acceptance testing and commission are essential elements of the quality assurance program for imaging equipment. We present the results of a performance evaluation of Flat Panel-Based Cardiovascular Fluoroscopy X-ray Systems as a part of acceptance testing and commissioning. Measurements were obtained using a calibrated dose rate meter, patient equivalent phantoms, and Leeds image quality test tools. The results were compared with the manufacturer and European acceptability criteria. The entrance surface air kerma (ESAK) rate ranged from 8.0 to 12.0 mGy min−1 in the continuous mode and from 0.01 to 0.04 mGy fr−1 in the pulsed mode of operation. Detector-input air kerma rates ranged from 0.29 to 0.39 mGy min−1 in continuous mode and from 0.02 to 0.07 µGy fr−1 in pulsed mode. Fluoroscopy device half-value layer (HVL) ranged from 2.5 to 3.0 mm Al, and the low resolution ranged from 0.9 to 1.3%. The spatial resolution limit was double that of the image intensifier (2.4 to 3.6) lp/mm. Flat-panel fluoroscopy demonstrated superior image quality and dose performance as compared to conventional image intensifier-based fluoroscopy. The quality assurance measurements presented are essential in the rapid evaluation of the imaging system for acceptance testing and commissioning.

Geometrical accuracy of the Novalis stereotactic radiosurgery system for trigeminal neuralgia

2004 ◽  
Vol 101 (Supplement3) ◽  
pp. 351-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javad Rahimian ◽  
Joseph C. Chen ◽  
Ajay A. Rao ◽  
Michael R. Girvigian ◽  
Michael J. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Trigeminal Neuralgia ◽  
Image Fusion ◽  
Stereotactic Radiosurgery ◽  
Ct Images ◽  
Radiochromic Film ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Geometrical Accuracy ◽  
Fine Print

Object. Stringent geometrical accuracy and precision are required in the stereotactic radiosurgical treatment of patients. Accurate targeting is especially important when treating a patient in a single fraction of a very high radiation dose (90 Gy) to a small target such as that used in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (3 to 4—mm diameter). The purpose of this study was to determine the inaccuracies in each step of the procedure including imaging, fusion, treatment planning, and finally the treatment. The authors implemented a detailed quality-assurance program. Methods. Overall geometrical accuracy of the Novalis stereotactic system was evaluated using a Radionics Geometric Phantom Chamber. The phantom has several magnetic resonance (MR) and computerized tomography (CT) imaging—friendly objects of various shapes and sizes. Axial 1-mm-thick MR and CT images of the phantom were acquired using a T1-weighted three-dimensional spoiled gradient recalled pulse sequence and the CT scanning protocols used clinically in patients. The absolute errors due to MR image distortion, CT scan resolution, and the image fusion inaccuracies were measured knowing the exact physical dimensions of the objects in the phantom. The isocentric accuracy of the Novalis gantry and the patient support system was measured using the Winston—Lutz test. Because inaccuracies are cumulative, to calculate the system's overall spatial accuracy, the root mean square (RMS) of all the errors was calculated. To validate the accuracy of the technique, a 1.5-mm-diameter spherical marker taped on top of a radiochromic film was fixed parallel to the x–z plane of the stereotactic coordinate system inside the phantom. The marker was defined as a target on the CT images, and seven noncoplanar circular arcs were used to treat the target on the film. The calculated system RMS value was then correlated with the position of the target and the highest density on the radiochromic film. The mean spatial errors due to image fusion and MR imaging were 0.41 ± 0.3 and 0.22 ± 0.1 mm, respectively. Gantry and couch isocentricities were 0.3 ± 0.1 and 0.6 ± 0.15 mm, respectively. The system overall RMS values were 0.9 and 0.6 mm with and without the couch errors included, respectively (isocenter variations due to couch rotation are microadjusted between couch positions). The positional verification of the marker was within 0.7 ± 0.1 mm of the highest optical density on the radiochromic film, correlating well with the system's overall RMS value. The overall mean system deviation was 0.32 ± 0.42 mm. Conclusions. The highest spatial errors were caused by image fusion and gantry rotation. A comprehensive quality-assurance program was developed for the authors' stereotactic radiosurgery program that includes medical imaging, linear accelerator mechanical isocentricity, and treatment delivery. For a successful treatment of trigeminal neuralgia with a 4-mm cone, the overall RMS value of equal to or less than 1 mm must be guaranteed.

Implementation and Assessment of a Telecytology Quality Assurance Program

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. S63-S64
Author(s):  
Jonathan Marotti ◽  
Diane M. Green ◽  
Rebecca Proskovec ◽  
Linda Yaman ◽  
Danielle Dunn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Quality Assurance Program

Benchmarking PRAISE-CANDU 1.0 With xLPR 1.0

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Wang ◽  
Xinjian Duan ◽  
Michael J. Kozluk
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Fracture Mechanics ◽  
Software Quality ◽  
Verification And Validation ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Software Quality Assurance ◽  
Full Compliance ◽  
Low Probability ◽  
State Of Art

A probabilistic fracture mechanics code, PRAISE-CANDU 1.0, has been developed under a software quality assurance program in full compliance with CSA N286.7-99, and was initially released in 2012 June. Extensive verification and validation has been performed on PRAISE-CANDU 1.0 for the purpose of software quality assurance. This paper presents the benchmarking performed between PRAISE-CANDU 1.0 and xLPR (eXtremely Low Probability of Rupture) version 1.0 using the cases from the xLPR pilot study. The xLPR code was developed in a configuration management and quality assured manner. Both codes adopted a state-of-art code architecture for the treatment of the uncertainties. Inputs to the PRAISE-CANDU were established as close as possible to those used in corresponding xLPR cases. Excellent agreement has been observed among the results obtained from the two PFM codes in spite of some differences between the codes. This benchmarking is considered to be an important element of the validation of PRAISE-CANDU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document