SU-F-T-464: Development of a Secondary Check Procedure to Evaluated Flatness and Symmetry Discrepancies Detected During Daily Morning QA

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (6Part20) ◽  
pp. 3569-3570
Author(s):  
M Wagar ◽  
S Friesen ◽  
Y Lyatskaya ◽  
D O'Farrell ◽  
M Bhagwat
Keyword(s):  
Check Procedure

Development of a daily quality check procedure for the High-Resolution Research Tomograph (HRRT) using natural LSO background radioactivity

2002 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 2074-2078 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Knoess ◽  
T. Gremillion ◽  
M. Schmand ◽  
M.E. Casey ◽  
L. Eriksson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Quality Check ◽  
Check Procedure

scholarly journals A robustness check procedure for hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery

2018 ◽  
Vol 129 (Suppl1) ◽  
pp. 140-146
Author(s):  
Joshua Chiu ◽  
Steve Braunstein ◽  
Jean Nakamura ◽  
Philip Theodosopoulos ◽  
Penny Sneed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gamma Knife ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Gamma Knife Radiosurgery ◽  
Target Coverage ◽  
Quality Assurance Procedure ◽  
Dose Distributions ◽  
Treatment Delivery ◽  
Maximum Tolerance ◽  
Check Procedure ◽  
Robustness Check

OBJECTIVEInterfractional residual patient shifts are often observed during the delivery of hypofractionated brain radiosurgery. In this study, the authors developed a robustness treatment planning check procedure to assess the dosimetric effects of residual target shifts on hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS).METHODSThe residual patient shifts were determined during the simulation process immediately after patient immobilization. To mimic incorporation of residual target shifts during treatment delivery, a quality assurance procedure was developed to sample and shift individual shots according to the residual uncertainties in the prescribed treatment plan. This procedure was tested and demonstrated for 10 hypofractionated GKRS cases.RESULTSThe maximum residual target shifts were less than 1 mm for the studied cases. When incorporating such shifts, the target coverage varied by 1.9% ± 2.2% (range 0.0%–7.1%) and selectivity varied by 3.6% ± 2.5% (range 1.1%–9.3%). Furthermore, when incorporating extra random shifts on the order of 0.5 mm, the target coverage decreased by as much as 7%, and nonisocentric variation in the dose distributions was noted for the studied cases.CONCLUSIONSA pretreatment robustness check procedure was developed and demonstrated for hypofractionated GKRS. Further studies are underway to implement this procedure to assess maximum tolerance levels for individual patient cases.

A Portable Hearing Test Program for the Public Schools

1980 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 218-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Ciani
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Public School ◽  
School Children ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Test Program ◽  
The Public ◽  
Hearing Test ◽  
Check Procedure

A hearing aid test prograrn was developed, using portable electroacoustic equipment, to assess and improve the condition of hearing aids worn by Cincinnati public school children. Hearing aid checks were performed semi-annually for both school auditory training equipment and personal hearing aids. The program's results have shown the need for an additional mid-year check and subsequent maintenance for school auditory training equipment. A bonus of the program has been the visibility it has afforded the hearing aid check procedure.

Dimensionality and Validity of a Structured Telephone Reference Check Procedure

2004 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 745-772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J. Taylor ◽  
Karl Pajo ◽  
Gordon W. Cheung ◽  
Paul Stringfield
Keyword(s):  
Check Procedure
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document