Literature DB >> 18769968

Application of QC_DR software for acceptance testing and routine quality control of direct digital radiography systems: initial experiences using the Italian Association of Physicist in Medicine quality control protocol.

Andrea Nitrosi1, Marco Bertolini, Giovanni Borasi, Andrea Botti, Adriana Barani, Stefano Rivetti, Luisa Pierotti.   

Abstract

Ideally, medical x-ray imaging systems should be designed to deliver maximum image quality at an acceptable radiation risk to the patient. Quality assurance procedures are employed to ensure that these standards are maintained. A quality control protocol for direct digital radiography (DDR) systems is described and discussed. Software to automatically process and analyze the required images was developed. In this paper, the initial results obtained on equipment of different DDR manufacturers were reported. The protocol was developed to highlight even small discrepancies in standard operating performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18769968      PMCID: PMC3043728          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-008-9150-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  15 in total

1.  Signal-to-noise ratio and spatial resolution in x-ray electronic imagers: is the MTF a relevant parameter?

Authors:  J P Moy
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Determination of the detective quantum efficiency of a digital x-ray detector: comparison of three evaluations using a common image data set.

Authors:  Ulrich Neitzel; Susanne Günther-Kohfahl; Giovanni Borasi; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Assessment of the effects of pixel loss on image quality in direct digital radiography.

Authors:  R Padgett; C J Kotre
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2004-03-21       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  A framework for optimising the radiographic technique in digital X-ray imaging.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; James T Dobbins; Joseph Y Lo; Martin P Tornai
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

5.  A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system.

Authors:  N W Marshall
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-04-26       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Quality control for digital mammography: part II. Recommendations from the ACRIN DMIST trial.

Authors:  Martin J Yaffe; Aili K Bloomquist; Gordon E Mawdsley; Etta D Pisano; R Edward Hendrick; Laurie L Fajardo; John M Boone; Kalpana Kanal; Mahadevappa Mahesh; Richard C Fleischman; Joseph Och; Mark B Williams; Daniel J Beideck; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Contrast-detail analysis of three flat panel detectors for digital radiography.

Authors:  Giovanni Borasi; Ehsan Samei; Marco Bertolini; Andrea Nitrosi; Davide Tassoni
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Evaluation and testing of computed radiography systems.

Authors:  P Charnock; P A Connolly; D Hughes; B M Moores
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

Review 9.  Review of image quality standards to control digital X-ray systems.

Authors:  A Schreiner-Karoussou
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2006-02-07       Impact factor: 0.972

10.  The DIMOND project and its impact on radiation protection.

Authors:  K Faulkner
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2006-02-03       Impact factor: 0.972

View more
  1 in total

1.  Evaluation of cassette-based digital radiography detectors using standardized image quality metrics: AAPM TG-150 Draft Image Detector Tests.

Authors:  Guang Li; Travis C Greene; Thomas K Nishino; Charles E Willis
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.