Literature DB >> 8413039

Medical accelerator safety considerations: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 35.

J A Purdy, P J Biggs, C Bowers, E Dally, W Downs, B A Fraass, C J Karzmark, F Khan, P Morgan, R Morton.   

Abstract

Ensuring safe operation for a medical accelerator is a difficult task. Users must assume more responsibility in using contemporary equipment. Additionally, users must work closely with manufacturers in promoting the safe and effective use of such complex equipment. Complex treatment techniques and treatment modality changeover procedures merit detailed, unambiguous written procedural instruction at the control console. A thorough "hands on" training period after receiving instructions, and before assuming treatment responsibilities, is essential for all technologists. Unambiguous written instructions must also be provided to guide technologists in safe response when equipment malfunctions or exhibits unexpected behavior or after any component has been changed or readjusted. Technologists should be given a written list of the appropriate individuals to consult when unexpected machine behavior occurs. They should be assisted in identifying aberrant behavior of equipment. Many centers already provide this instruction, but others may not. Practiced response and discussion with technologists should be a part of an ongoing quality assurance program. An important aspect of a safety program is the need for continuous vigilance. Table III gives a summary of a comprehensive safety program for medical accelerators. Table IV gives a list of summary recommendations as an example of how one might mitigate the consequences of an equipment failure and improve procedures and operator response in the context of the environment described. Most of these recommendations can be implemented almost immediately at any individual treatment center.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8413039     DOI: 10.1118/1.596977

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  6 in total

1.  QA issues for computer-controlled treatment delivery: this is not your old R/V system any more!

Authors:  Benedick A Fraass
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  [Rules and regulations applying to incidents in radiotherapy].

Authors:  F Lohr; W Baus; H Vorwerk; B Schlömp; L André; D Georg; N Hodapp
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 3.621

3.  Adverse Events Involving Radiation Oncology Medical Devices: Comprehensive Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration Data, 1991 to 2015.

Authors:  Michael J Connor; Deborah C Marshall; Vitali Moiseenko; Kevin Moore; Laura Cervino; Todd Atwood; Parag Sanghvi; Arno J Mundt; Todd Pawlicki; Abram Recht; Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  The report of Task Group 100 of the AAPM: Application of risk analysis methods to radiation therapy quality management.

Authors:  M Saiful Huq; Benedick A Fraass; Peter B Dunscombe; John P Gibbons; Geoffrey S Ibbott; Arno J Mundt; Sasa Mutic; Jatinder R Palta; Frank Rath; Bruce R Thomadsen; Jeffrey F Williamson; Ellen D Yorke
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  An Assessment of Dosimetric Characteristics of Inline 2.5 Mega Voltage Unflattened Imaging X-Ray Beam.

Authors:  Tamilarasan Rajamanickam; Sivakumar Muthu; Perumal Murugan; Chinnaiah Dinesan; Chandrasekaran Mekala; Krishnamoorthy Senthilnathan; Narayanasamy Arunai Nambi Raj; Padmanabhan Ramesh Babu
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2019-08-01

6.  Dose consumption for quality assurance and maintenance at a dedicated IORT accelerator.

Authors:  Frank W Hensley
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.