High incidence of defective ultrasound transducers in use in routine clinical practice

European Journal of Echocardiography

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 389-394

  Mårtensson, Mattias ^a   Olsson, Mats ^b   Segall, Björn ^d   Fraser, Alan G ^c   Winter, Reidar ^b   Brodin, Lars Åke ^a  

^a ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^d BBS Medical AB ^*  (Sweden)

Author keywords

Defect; Error; Probe; Test; Transducer; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; ELECTRIC ACTIVITY; ERROR; HISTOGRAM; HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PIEZOELECTRICITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCER;

CHILD; DUCTUS ARTERIOSUS, PATENT; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSDUCERS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, DOPPLER, COLOR;

EID: 64749104230     PISSN: 15252167     EISSN: 15322114     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ejechocard/jen295     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. AIUM. The AIUM 100 mm test object and recommended procedures for its use. AIUM, 1974.
2. Satrapa J, Doblhoff G, Schultz HJ. Automated quality control of ultrasonic B-mode scanners by applying an TMM 3D cyst phantom. Ultraschall Med 2006; 27:262-72.
3. Weigang B, Moore GW, Gessert J, Phillips WH, Schafer M. The Method and Effects of Transducer degradation on image quality and the clinical efficacy of diagnostic sonography. J Diagn Med Sonog 2002; 19:3-13.
4. AIUM. Technical Standard Committee. Methods for Measuring Performance of Pulse-Echo Ultrasound Imaging Equipment. AIUM, 1990.
5. AIUM. Technical Standard Committee. Methods for Measuring Performance of Pulse-Echo Ultrasound Imaging Equipment, Part II: Digital Methods, Stage1. AIUM, 1995.
6. AIUM. Technical Standard Committee. Quality Assurance Manual for Gray-Scale Ultrasound Scanners, Stage 2. AIUM, 1995.
7. Brendel K, Filipczynski LS, Gerstner R, Hill CR, Kossof G, Quentin G et al. Methods of measuring the performance of ultrasonic pulse-echo diagnostic equipment. Ultrasound Med Biol 1976; 2:343-50.
8. Goodsitt MM, Carson PL, Witt S, Hykes DL, Kofler JM. Real-time B-mode ultrasound quality control test procedures. Report of AAPM Ultrasound Task Group No. 1. Med Phys 1998; 25:1385-406.
9. Price R. Routine quality assurance of ultrasound imaging systems. IPSM Report No. 71. The Institute of Physical Sciences in Medicine, 1995.
10. Carson PL. Rapid evaluation of many pulse echo system characteristics by use of a triggered pulse burst generator with exponential decay. J Clin Ultrasound 1976; 4:259-63.
11. Dudley NJ, Griffith K, Houldsworth G, Holloway M, Dunn MA. A review of two alternative ultrasound quality assurance programmes. Eur J Ultrasound 2000; 12:233-45.
12. Gibson NM, Dudley NJ, Griffith K. A computerised quality control testing system for B-mode ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol 2001; 27: 1697-711.
13. Hall AJ, Fleming JEE. A method of calibrating contact B-scanners. Ultrasonics 1978;277-81.
14. Madsen EL. Quality assurance for gray-scale imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol 2002; 26:45-50.
15. Pye SD, Ellis W, MacGillivray T. Medical ultrasound: a new metric of performance for grey-scale imaging.. J Phys 2004; 1:187-92.
16. Rownd JJ, Madsen EL, Zagzebski JA, Frank GR, Dong F. Phantoms and automated system for testing the resolution of ultrasound scanners. Ultrasound Med Biol 1997; 23:245-60.
17. Teirlink CJPM, Bezemer RA, Kollmann C, Lubbers J, Hoskins PR, Fish P et al. Development of an example flow test object and comparison of five of these test objects, constructed in various laboratories. Ultrasonics 1998; 36:653-60.
18. Thijssen JM, Weijers G, de Korte CL. Objective performance testing and quality assurance of medical ultrasound equipment. Ultrasound Med Biol 2007; 33:460-71.
19. Thijssen JM, Wijk MCv, Cuypers MHM. Performance testing of medical echo/Doppler equipment. Eur J Ultrasound 2002; 15:151-64.
20. Jaffe CC, Harris DJ, Taylor KJW, Viscomi G, Mannes E. Sonographic transducer performance cannot be evaluated with clinical images. Am J Roentgenol 1981; 137:1239-43.