Computed radiography X-ray exposure trends.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Computed radiography provides correct optical density on film, independent of the incident radiation exposure, but it can result in under- or overexposure of the imaging plate. In the current study, we evaluated the radiation exposure trends of computed radiography over a 2-year period for portable chest examinations to determine and compare the radiographic techniques of the computed radiography system relative to conventional screen-film detectors. METHODS: A Fuji computed radiography system was interfaced to a digital workstation to track system usage and examination demographics, including examination type and sensitivity number. Hard-copy films were used for diagnosis. The sensitivity number, a value inversely related to incident exposure on the imaging plate, was used to determine whether the proper techniques were used by the technologists. RESULTS: The initial use of the computed radiography system revealed a broad distribution of exposures being used; complaints regarding noisy films (e.g., underexposure) resulted in subsequent overexposure for a significant number of films. A quality-control audit indicating excessive exposure resulted in educational feedback and a tighter distribution of exposures within the optimal range as determined by our radiologists. The average technique was approximately equivalent to a 200-speed system. CONCLUSION: Computed radiography provides excellent dynamic range and rescaling capabilities for proper film optical density, and thus fewer repeat examinations. However, underexposure results in suboptimal image quality that is related to excessive quantum mottle. Overexposure requires film audits to limit unnecessary radiation exposure. In general, the optimal exposures are achieved with approximately 1.5-2 times the incident detector exposure of a 400-speed rare-earth system. The ability of computed radiography to reduce radiation exposure is unlikely when compared with a typical rare-earth screen-film combination (400 speed) in terms of adequate image quality for the diagnosis of subtle, low-contrast findings. For certain diagnostic procedures (e.g., nasogastric tube placement verification), lower exposures can be tolerated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)313-318
Number of pages6
JournalAcademic Radiology
Volume3
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 1996

Fingerprint

Radiography
X-Rays
Quality Control
Thorax
Demography
Radiation Exposure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Computed radiography X-ray exposure trends. / Seibert, J Anthony; Shelton, D. K.; Moore, Elizabeth H.

In: Academic Radiology, Vol. 3, No. 4, 04.1996, p. 313-318.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5ce3c817e30a4bfdabc1912289630349,
title = "Computed radiography X-ray exposure trends.",
abstract = "RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Computed radiography provides correct optical density on film, independent of the incident radiation exposure, but it can result in under- or overexposure of the imaging plate. In the current study, we evaluated the radiation exposure trends of computed radiography over a 2-year period for portable chest examinations to determine and compare the radiographic techniques of the computed radiography system relative to conventional screen-film detectors. METHODS: A Fuji computed radiography system was interfaced to a digital workstation to track system usage and examination demographics, including examination type and sensitivity number. Hard-copy films were used for diagnosis. The sensitivity number, a value inversely related to incident exposure on the imaging plate, was used to determine whether the proper techniques were used by the technologists. RESULTS: The initial use of the computed radiography system revealed a broad distribution of exposures being used; complaints regarding noisy films (e.g., underexposure) resulted in subsequent overexposure for a significant number of films. A quality-control audit indicating excessive exposure resulted in educational feedback and a tighter distribution of exposures within the optimal range as determined by our radiologists. The average technique was approximately equivalent to a 200-speed system. CONCLUSION: Computed radiography provides excellent dynamic range and rescaling capabilities for proper film optical density, and thus fewer repeat examinations. However, underexposure results in suboptimal image quality that is related to excessive quantum mottle. Overexposure requires film audits to limit unnecessary radiation exposure. In general, the optimal exposures are achieved with approximately 1.5-2 times the incident detector exposure of a 400-speed rare-earth system. The ability of computed radiography to reduce radiation exposure is unlikely when compared with a typical rare-earth screen-film combination (400 speed) in terms of adequate image quality for the diagnosis of subtle, low-contrast findings. For certain diagnostic procedures (e.g., nasogastric tube placement verification), lower exposures can be tolerated.",
author = "Seibert, {J Anthony} and Shelton, {D. K.} and Moore, {Elizabeth H}",
year = "1996",
month = "4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "313--318",
journal = "Academic Radiology",
issn = "1076-6332",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Computed radiography X-ray exposure trends.

AU - Seibert, J Anthony

AU - Shelton, D. K.

AU - Moore, Elizabeth H

PY - 1996/4

Y1 - 1996/4

N2 - RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Computed radiography provides correct optical density on film, independent of the incident radiation exposure, but it can result in under- or overexposure of the imaging plate. In the current study, we evaluated the radiation exposure trends of computed radiography over a 2-year period for portable chest examinations to determine and compare the radiographic techniques of the computed radiography system relative to conventional screen-film detectors. METHODS: A Fuji computed radiography system was interfaced to a digital workstation to track system usage and examination demographics, including examination type and sensitivity number. Hard-copy films were used for diagnosis. The sensitivity number, a value inversely related to incident exposure on the imaging plate, was used to determine whether the proper techniques were used by the technologists. RESULTS: The initial use of the computed radiography system revealed a broad distribution of exposures being used; complaints regarding noisy films (e.g., underexposure) resulted in subsequent overexposure for a significant number of films. A quality-control audit indicating excessive exposure resulted in educational feedback and a tighter distribution of exposures within the optimal range as determined by our radiologists. The average technique was approximately equivalent to a 200-speed system. CONCLUSION: Computed radiography provides excellent dynamic range and rescaling capabilities for proper film optical density, and thus fewer repeat examinations. However, underexposure results in suboptimal image quality that is related to excessive quantum mottle. Overexposure requires film audits to limit unnecessary radiation exposure. In general, the optimal exposures are achieved with approximately 1.5-2 times the incident detector exposure of a 400-speed rare-earth system. The ability of computed radiography to reduce radiation exposure is unlikely when compared with a typical rare-earth screen-film combination (400 speed) in terms of adequate image quality for the diagnosis of subtle, low-contrast findings. For certain diagnostic procedures (e.g., nasogastric tube placement verification), lower exposures can be tolerated.

AB - RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Computed radiography provides correct optical density on film, independent of the incident radiation exposure, but it can result in under- or overexposure of the imaging plate. In the current study, we evaluated the radiation exposure trends of computed radiography over a 2-year period for portable chest examinations to determine and compare the radiographic techniques of the computed radiography system relative to conventional screen-film detectors. METHODS: A Fuji computed radiography system was interfaced to a digital workstation to track system usage and examination demographics, including examination type and sensitivity number. Hard-copy films were used for diagnosis. The sensitivity number, a value inversely related to incident exposure on the imaging plate, was used to determine whether the proper techniques were used by the technologists. RESULTS: The initial use of the computed radiography system revealed a broad distribution of exposures being used; complaints regarding noisy films (e.g., underexposure) resulted in subsequent overexposure for a significant number of films. A quality-control audit indicating excessive exposure resulted in educational feedback and a tighter distribution of exposures within the optimal range as determined by our radiologists. The average technique was approximately equivalent to a 200-speed system. CONCLUSION: Computed radiography provides excellent dynamic range and rescaling capabilities for proper film optical density, and thus fewer repeat examinations. However, underexposure results in suboptimal image quality that is related to excessive quantum mottle. Overexposure requires film audits to limit unnecessary radiation exposure. In general, the optimal exposures are achieved with approximately 1.5-2 times the incident detector exposure of a 400-speed rare-earth system. The ability of computed radiography to reduce radiation exposure is unlikely when compared with a typical rare-earth screen-film combination (400 speed) in terms of adequate image quality for the diagnosis of subtle, low-contrast findings. For certain diagnostic procedures (e.g., nasogastric tube placement verification), lower exposures can be tolerated.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030119817&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030119817&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8796680

AN - SCOPUS:0030119817

VL - 3

SP - 313

EP - 318

JO - Academic Radiology

JF - Academic Radiology

SN - 1076-6332

IS - 4

ER -