Literature DB >> 19885636

One year's results from a server-based system for performing reject analysis and exposure analysis in computed radiography.

A Kyle Jones1, Raimund Polman, Charles E Willis, S Jeff Shepard.   

Abstract

Rejected images represent both unnecessary radiation exposure to patients and inefficiency in the imaging operation. Rejected images are inherent to projection radiography, where patient positioning and alignment are integral components of image quality. Patient motion and artifacts unique to digital image receptor technology can result in rejected images also. We present a centralized, server-based solution for the collection, archival, and distribution of rejected image and exposure indicator data that automates the data collection process. Reject analysis program (RAP) and exposure indicator data were collected and analyzed during a 1-year period. RAP data were sorted both by reason for repetition and body part examined. Data were also stratified by clinical area for further investigation. The monthly composite reject rate for our institution fluctuated between 8% and 10%. Positioning errors were the main cause of repeated images (77.3%). Stratification of data by clinical area revealed that areas where computed radiography (CR) is seldom used suffer from higher reject rates than areas where it is used frequently. S values were log-normally distributed for examinations performed under either manual or automatic exposure control. The distributions were positively skewed and leptokurtic. S value decreases due to radiologic technology student rotations, and CR plate reader calibrations were observed. Our data demonstrate that reject analysis is still necessary and useful in the era of digital imaging. It is vital though that analysis be combined with exposure indicator analysis, as digital radiography is not self-policing in terms of exposure. When combined, the two programs are a powerful tool for quality assurance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 19885636      PMCID: PMC3056967          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-009-9236-2

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


  12 in total

1.  Comparative reject analysis in conventional film-screen and digital storage phosphor radiography.

Authors:  S Peer; R Peer; M Walcher; M Pohl; W Jaschke
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Minimizing Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Modality Worklist patient/study selection errors.

Authors:  P M Kuzmak; R E Dayhoff
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Computed radiography dose data mining and surveillance as an ongoing quality assurance improvement process.

Authors:  Brent K Stewart; Kalpana M Kanal; James R Perdue; Frederick A Mann
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Maintaining quality control using a radiological digital X-ray dashboard.

Authors:  Todd R Minnigh; Jacqueline Gallet
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Digital mobile radiography.

Authors:  S S Sagel; R G Jost; H S Glazer; P L Molina; D J Anderson; S L Solomon; J Schwarberg
Journal:  J Thorac Imaging       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 3.000

6.  Image retake analysis in digital radiography using DICOM header information.

Authors:  C Prieto; E Vano; J I Ten; J M Fernandez; A I Iñiguez; N Arevalo; A Litcheva; E Crespo; A Floriano; D Martinez
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Digital radiography reject analysis: data collection methodology, results, and recommendations from an in-depth investigation at two hospitals.

Authors:  David H Foos; W James Sehnert; Bruce Reiner; Eliot L Siegel; Arthur Segal; David L Waldman
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-04-30       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Computed radiography X-ray exposure trends.

Authors:  J A Seibert; D K Shelton; E H Moore
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  A two-year reject/retake profile analysis in pediatric radiology.

Authors:  W K Chu; S Ferguson; B Wunder; R Smith; J J Vanhoutte
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 1.316

10.  Is reject analysis necessary after converting to computed radiography?

Authors:  Rosemary Honea; Maria Elissa Blado; Yinlin Ma
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2002-03-21       Impact factor: 4.056

View more
  8 in total

1.  Detecting Technical Image Quality in Radiology Reports.

Authors:  Thusitha Mabotuwana; Varun S Bhandarkar; Christopher S Hall; Martin L Gunn
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-12-05

2.  Optimization of the radiological protection of patients undergoing digital radiography.

Authors:  Menglong Zhang; Cunkun Chu
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Investigation of the variability in the assessment of digital chest X-ray image quality.

Authors:  Jacquelyn S Whaley; Barry D Pressman; Jonathan R Wilson; Lionel Bravo; William J Sehnert; David H Foos
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Evaluation of digital radiography practice using exposure index tracking.

Authors:  Alexander W Scott; Yifang Zhou; Janet Allahverdian; Jessica L Nute; Christina Lee
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Reject rate analysis in digital radiography: an Australian emergency imaging department case study.

Authors:  Samantha Atkinson; Michael Neep; Deborah Starkey
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2019-07-18

Review 6.  Digital radiography exposure indices: A review.

Authors:  Ursula Mothiram; Patrick C Brennan; Sarah J Lewis; Bernadette Moran; John Robinson
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2014-05-11

7.  Image rejects in general direct digital radiography.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann; Tine Blomberg Rosanowsky; Camilla Jensen; Kenneth Hong Ching Wah
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2015-10-08

8.  Repeat analysis of intraoral digital imaging performed by undergraduate students using a complementary metal oxide semiconductor sensor: An institutional case study.

Authors:  Mohd Yusmiaidil Putera Mohd Yusof; Nur Liyana Abdul Rahman; Amiza Aqiela Ahmad Asri; Noor Ilyani Othman; Ilham Wan Mokhtar
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2017-12-12
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.