Literature DB >> 33969425

COMPARISON OF CONVENTIONAL HAND EXAMINATION ON SIX OPTIMISED DR SYSTEMS.

Helle Precht1,2,3, Claus Bjørn Outzen1, Martin Weber Kusk4, Malene Bisgaard1, Dag Waaler5.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges in comparing digital radiography (DR) systems from different vendors for various combinations of exposure factors in posterior-anterior hand radiographs. Image quality was evaluated for a range of tube voltages and tube current-time products using a technical contrast-detail (CDRAD) phantom and an anthropomorphic hand phantom. 900 technical CDRAD images were analysed providing quality figures of merit (IQFinv) and two experienced reporting radiographers using visual grading analysis (VGA) scored 108 anthropomorphic images. This study demonstrates the differences between the DR systems included. When compensating for variations in dose, Canon showed superior results for technical image quality and Fuji for visual image quality for a standard dose point at DR hand examination (ln(DAP) 1.1, 50 kV and 2.5 mAs).
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33969425      PMCID: PMC8808537          DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncab067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry        ISSN: 0144-8420            Impact factor:   0.972


  20 in total

1.  COMPARISON OF WIRELESS DETECTORS FOR DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY SYSTEMS: IMAGE QUALITY AND DOSE.

Authors:  J E M Mourik; P van der Tol; W J H Veldkamp; J Geleijns
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 0.972

2.  A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology.

Authors:  Sara Börjesson; Markus Håkansson; Magnus Båth; Susanne Kheddache; Sune Svensson; Anders Tingberg; Anna Grahn; Mark Ruschin; Bengt Hemdal; Sören Mattsson; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

3.  An investigation into the validity of utilising the CDRAD 2.0 phantom for optimisation studies in digital radiography.

Authors:  Sadeq Al-Murshedi; Peter Hogg; Andrew England
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  The effect of anatomical noise on perception of low contrast in intra-oral radiographs: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Lars Olsson; Mats Nilsson; Björn Svenson; Kristina Hellén-Halme
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Correlation between physical measurements and observer evaluations of image quality in digital chest radiography.

Authors:  Asena Yalcin; Turan Olgar; Tanzer Sancak; Gokce Kaan Atac; Serdar Akyar
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 6.  Digital imaging and radiographic practise in diagnostic radiography: An overview of current knowledge and practice in Europe.

Authors:  S Mc Fadden; T Roding; G de Vries; M Benwell; H Bijwaard; J Scheurleer
Journal:  Radiography (Lond)       Date:  2017-12-07

7.  Radiographers' perspectives' on Visual Grading Analysis as a scientific method to evaluate image quality.

Authors:  H Precht; J Hansson; C Outzen; P Hogg; A Tingberg
Journal:  Radiography (Lond)       Date:  2019-08-02

8.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Visual grading analysis of digital neonatal chest phantom X-ray images: Impact of detector type, dose and image processing on image quality.

Authors:  M H Smet; L Breysem; E Mussen; H Bosmans; N W Marshall; L Cockmartin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Influence of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm on image quality in coronary computed tomography angiography.

Authors:  Helle Precht; Jesper Thygesen; Oke Gerke; Kenneth Egstrup; Dag Waaler; Jess Lambrechtsen
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2016-12-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.