A Almén1, M Lööf, S Mattsson. 1. Department of Radiation Physics, University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Investigation of examination technique, image quality, and absorbed dose to the patients in paediatric radiology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In total, 19 Swedish hospitals participated in the study. Using a questionnaire, the hospitals described their examination technique for the pelvis, urinary tract, colon, scoliosis, and lung. The image quality and patient dose were experimentally studied for the simulated pelvis examination of a 1-year-old child. This examination was carried out with a test object containing a contrast-detail phantom. TL dosimeters were used to determine the absorbed dose on the surface of the phantom, approximately corresponding to the absorbed dose on the surface of the patient. RESULTS: Examination techniques varied considerably among the hospitals, the most striking difference concerning the film-screen sensitivity. Consequently, there was a variation in the absorbed dose on the surface of the phantom, from 0.09 mGy to 1.7 mGy (mean 0.65 mGy). For a large range of doses, 0.4-1.7 mGy, the image quality was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The unharmonized, and in many places unoptimized, examination techniques led to a great variation in the absorbed dose to the children examined.
PURPOSE: Investigation of examination technique, image quality, and absorbed dose to the patients in paediatric radiology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In total, 19 Swedish hospitals participated in the study. Using a questionnaire, the hospitals described their examination technique for the pelvis, urinary tract, colon, scoliosis, and lung. The image quality and patient dose were experimentally studied for the simulated pelvis examination of a 1-year-old child. This examination was carried out with a test object containing a contrast-detail phantom. TL dosimeters were used to determine the absorbed dose on the surface of the phantom, approximately corresponding to the absorbed dose on the surface of the patient. RESULTS: Examination techniques varied considerably among the hospitals, the most striking difference concerning the film-screen sensitivity. Consequently, there was a variation in the absorbed dose on the surface of the phantom, from 0.09 mGy to 1.7 mGy (mean 0.65 mGy). For a large range of doses, 0.4-1.7 mGy, the image quality was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The unharmonized, and in many places unoptimized, examination techniques led to a great variation in the absorbed dose to the children examined.