Radiography
Volume 15, Issue 3 , Pages 262-268 , August 2009

Optimisation of X-ray examinations: General principles and an Irish perspective

Received 23 October 2007 ,Revised 28 April 2008 ,Accepted 21 July 2008.

References 

  1. S.I. No. 478. European communities (medical ionising radiation protection) regulations. Dublin Stationery Office; 2002.
  2. ICRP Publication 73 Radiological protection and safety in medicine. Annals of the ICRP. 2007;26(2):1–31
  3. Matthews K, Patrick C, Brennan . Justification of X-ray examinations: general principles and an Irish perspective. Radiography. 2008;14(4):349–355
  4. ICRP Publication 101 The optimisation of radiological protection: broadening the process. Annals of the ICRP. 2006;36(3):69–87
  5. ICRP Publication 60 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Annals of the ICRP. 1991;21:1–3
  6. ICRP . History, policies, procedures. Annals of the ICRP. 1998;28(1):1–29
  7. CEU . Council Directive 97/43 Euratom on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionising radiation in relation to medical exposure and repealing Directive 84/466 Euratom. Luxembourg: Council of the European Union; 1997;
  8. S.I. No. 250. European community (radiological and nuclear medicine installations) regulations. Dublin Stationery Office; 1998.
  9. S.I. No. 125. Radiological protection act, 1991 (ionising radiation) order. Dublin Stationery Office; 2000.
  10. European Commission . Criteria for acceptability of radiological (including radiotherapy) and nuclear medicine installations: radiation protection 91. Luxembourg: OOPEC; 1997;
  11. IPEM 77 Recommended standards for routine testing of diagnostic X-ray systems. Report 77 York, UK: Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine; 1997;
  12. Fennell S. Manager, Medical, Dental and Veterinary Section, Regulatory Services Division, Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, 3 Clonskeagh Square, Dublin 1; 2007 (personal communication).
  13. McCrudden T, Brennan PC, Matthews K. Performance testing on X-ray equipment used for paediatric radiography in Ireland. In: Proceedings of RSNA; 2004 [1811PD].
  14. IPEM 91 Recommended standards for the routine performance testing of diagnostic X-ray imaging systems. York, UK: Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine; 2005;
  15. IEC International Standard 601-1-3. Medical electrical equipment – part 1: general requirements for safety. 3: collateral standard: general requirements for radiation protection in diagnostic X-ray equipment. 1st ed. International Electrotechnical Commission 1994-07.
  16. IEC International Standard 60601-2-7. Medical electrical equipment – part 2–7: particular requirements for the safety of high-voltage generators of diagnostic X-ray generators. 2nd ed. International Electrotechnical Commission 1998–02.
  17. IEC International Standard 60522. Determination of the permanent filtration of X-ray tube assemblies. 2nd ed. International Electrotechnical Commission 1999-02; 2003.
  18. IEC International Standard 60336. Medical electrical equipment – X-ray tube assemblies for medical diagnosis – characteristics of focal spots. 4th ed. International Electrotechnical Commission 2005–04.
  19. Kepler K, Vladimirov A, Servomaa A. Interlaboratory comparison and accreditation in quality control testing of diagnostic X-ray equipment. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):198–200
  20. Mazzocchi S, Belli G, Busoni S, Gori1 C, Menchi I, Salucci P, et al. AEC set up optimisation with computed radiography imaging. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;117(1–3):169–173
  21. Nikodemová D, Horváthová M, Salá D. Implementation of QA and QC standards in radiology in Slovakia. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;117(1–3):274–276
  22. Schreiner-Karoussou A. Dose optimisation in computed radiography. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;117(1–3):139–142
  23. Faulkner K. The DIMOND project and its impact on radiation protection. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;117(1–3):3–6
  24. SENTINEL project website. Safety and efficacy for new techniques and imaging using new equipment to support European legislation. Available at <www.dimond3.org> [accessed 10th May 2007].
  25. Faulkner K, editor. Contract: FIGM-CT-2000–00061. Measures for optimising radiological information and dose in digital imaging and interventional radiology (DIMOND III). Available at <ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp5-euratom/docs/fp5-euratom_dimondiii_projsum_en.pdf> [accessed 10th May 2007].
  26. ICRP. DRAFT recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection; 2007.
  27. Almen A, Tinberg A, Mattsson S, Besjakov J, Kheddache S, Lanhede B, et al. The influence of different technique factors on image quality of lumbar spine radiographs as evaluated by established CEC image criteria. British Journal of Radiology. 2000;73:1192–1199
  28. Grondin Y, Matthews K, McEntee M, Rainford L, Casey M, Tonra M, et al. Dose reducing strategies in combination offers substantial potential benefits to females requiring X-ray examination. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2004;108(2):123–132
  29. Almén A, Tingberg A, Besjakov J, Mattsson S. The use of reference image criteria in X-ray diagnostics: an application for the optimisation of lumbar spine radiographs. European Radiology. 2004;14:1561–1567
  30. McEntee MF, Brennan PC, O'Connor G. The effect of X-ray tube potential on the image quality of PA chest radiographs when using digital image acquisition devices. Radiography. 2004;10:287–292
  31. Launders JH, Cowen AR, Bury RF, Hawkridge P. Towards image quality, beam energy and effective dose optimisation in digital thoracic radiography. European Radiology. 2001;11(5):870–875
  32. Tingberg A, Sjöström D. Optimisation of image plate radiography with respect to tube voltage. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):286–293
  33. Doyle P, Martin CJ, Gentle D. Dose image quality optimisation in digital chest radiography. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):269–272
  34. Hansson J, Bath M, Hakansson M, Grundin H, Bjurklint E, Orvestad P, et al. An optimisation strategy in a digital environment applied to neonatal chest imaging. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):278–285
  35. Marshall K. Optimisation of dose per image in digital imaging. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2004;94(1–2):83–87
  36. Persliden J, Beckman KW, Geijer H, Andersson T. Dose-image optimisation in digital radiology with a direct digital detector: an example applied to pelvic examinations. European Radiology. 2002;12:1584–1588
  37. Peters SE, Brennan PC. Digital radiography: are the manufacturers' settings too high? Optimisation of the Kodak digital radiography system with aid of the computed radiography dose index. European Radiology. 2002;12:2381–2387
  38. Hansen J, Jurik AG, Fiirgaard B, Egund N. Optimisation of scoliosis examinations in children. Pediatric Radiology. 2003;33:752–765
  39. Roberts JA, Evans SC, Rees M. Optimisation of imaging technique used in direct digital radiography. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2006;26:287–299
  40. Redlich U, Hoeschen C, Doehring W. Assessment and optimisation of the image quality of chest radiography systems. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):264–268
  41. Robson KJ, Kotre CJ. Pilot study into optimisation of viewing conditions for electronically displayed images. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;117(1–3):298–303
  42. Bath M, Hakansson M, Borjesson S, Kheddache S, Grahn A, Ruschin M, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: introduction to the RADIUS chest trial. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):85–91
  43. Hakansson M, Bath M, Borjesson S, Kheddache S, Grahn A, Ruschin M, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: summary of the RADIUS chest trial. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):114–120
  44. Jadva-Patel H. The use of thin metal filters to reduce dose to patients. Radiography Today. 1991;57(651):18–22
  45. Brennan P, Nash M. Increasing FFD: an effective dose reducing tool for lateral lumbar spine investigations. Radiography. 1998;4:251–259
  46. Brennan PC, Hourihan SP. The cost effectiveness of carbon fibre cassettes in mobile chest radiography. European Radiology. 1998;8:301–305
  47. Nic an Ghearr FA, Brennan PC. The PA projection of the abdomen: a dose reducing technique. Radiography. 1998;4:195–203
  48. Brennan PC, Madigan E. Lumbar spine radiology: analysis of the postero-anterior projection. European Radiology. 2000;10:1197–1201
  49. Norrman E, Persliden J. A factorial experiment on image quality and radiation dose. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1–3):246–252
  50. Roshan S, Livingstone BS, Peace T, Sunny S, Victor Raj D. Fine tuning of work practices of common radiological investigations performed using computed radiography system. Radiography. 2007;13:126–132
  51. Lanhede B, Kheddache S, Sund P, Bjorneld P, Widell M, Alme N, et al. The influence of different technique factors on image quality of chest radiographs as evaluated by modified CEC image quality criteria. British Journal of Radiology. 2002;75:38–49
  52. European Commission . Referral guidelines for imaging: radiation protection 118. Luxembourg: OOPEC; 2001;
  53. European Commission . EUR 16260: European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images. Luxembourg: OOPEC; 1996;
  54. Medical Council . Protocols for standard radiological practice – good practice guidelines as defined by SI 478 of 2002. Irish Medical Council; 2004;http://www.medicalcouncil.ie/medical_ionising_radiation/default.asp[accessed 16th April 2007]
  55. Brennan PC, Johnston D. Irish X-ray departments demonstrate varying levels of adherence to European guidelines on good radiographic technique. British Journal of Radiology. 2002;75:243–248

PII: S1078-8174(08)00067-9

doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2008.07.002

Radiography
Volume 15, Issue 3 , Pages 262-268 , August 2009

Article Tools