Options for radiation dose optimisation in pelvic digital radiography: A phantom study

Radiography

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 256-263

  Manning Stanley, Anthony S ^a,b   Ward, Anthony J ^a   England, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b SALFORD ROYAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

AEC; Digital radiography (DR); Dose optimisation; Image quality; Pelvis; Phantom

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORTICAL BONE; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; DOSIMETRY; FEMUR NECK; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; PELVIS RADIOGRAPHY; PHANTOM; PILOT STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBIS SYMPHYSIS; RADIATION DOSE; SACRUM; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 84867331969     PISSN: 10788174     EISSN: 15322831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2012.06.002     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Hart D. Health Protection Agency: National patient dose database (NPDD). (Last reviewed 23.11.09). Available from: [accessed 12.12.10]. http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/Radiation/UnderstandingRadiation/UnderstandingRadiationTopics/MedicalRadiation/DiagnosticRadiology/diag_Npdd/.
2. Hart D., Wall B.F., Hillier M.C., Shrimpton P.C. Frequency and collective dose for medical and dental X-ray examinations in the UK, 2008 2010, Report HPA-CRCE-012, Health Protection Agency, Available from:, [accessed 19.04.12]. http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1287148001641.
3. The ionising radiation (medical exposure) regulations 2000. Statutory instrument 2000, No. 1059, Available from:, [accessed 24.12.10]. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/1059/contents/made.
4. Williams L. Pelvis and hips. Medical imaging: technique, reflection and evaluation 2006, 121-133. Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, Philadelphia, Chapter 10. B. Carver, E. Carver (Eds.).
5. Whitley A.S., Sloane C., Hoadley G., Moore A.D., Alsop C.W. The hip, pelvis and sacro-iliac joints. Clark's positioning in radiography 2005, Hodder Arnold, London, Chapter 5, p. 141-162. 12th ed.
6. Shephard C.T. Automatic exposure control. Radiographic image production and manipulation 2003, McGraw-Hill, New York, Chapter 9, p. 273-296.
7. George J., Eatough J.P., Mountford P.J., Koller C.J., Oxtoby J., Frain G. Patient dose optimisation in plain radiography based on standard exposure factors. Br J Radiol 2004, 77:858-863. [Online] [accessed 13.12.10]. 10.1259/bjr/21484847.
8. Connolly P., Moores B.M. Establishing local reference dose values and optimisation strategies. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2000, 90(1-2):229-234. Available from:, [Online] [accessed 13.12.10]. http://rpd.oxfordjournals.org.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/content/90/1-2/229.full.pdf%2Bhtml.
9. Cole P.R., Moores B.M. Computer applications in radiation protection. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 1995, 57(1-4):203-206.
10. Moores B.M., Anwyl D., Connolly P., Anslow L., Monaghan H., Hughes D., et al. IT-driven patient safety at the heart of radiology service improvement. Med Inform Internet Med 2005, 30(2):123-133. [Online] [accessed 13.12.10]. 10.1080/14639230500299097.
11. Brennan P.C., McDonnell S., O'Leary D. Increasing film-focus distance (FFD) reduces radiation dose for X-ray examinations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2004, 108(3):263-268. [Online] [accessed 07.09.10]. 10.1093/rpd/nch029.
12. Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics 2005, Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA.
13. Persliden J., Beckman K.W., Geijer H., Andersson T. Dose-image optimisation in digital radiology with a direct digital detector: an example applied to pelvic examinations. Eur Radiol 2002, 12(1):584-588. [Online] [accessed 02.12.10]. 10.1007/s00330-001-1206-0.
14. Mekis N., McEntree M.F., Stegnar P. PA positioning significantly reduces testicular dose during sacroiliac joint radiography. Radiography 2010, 16:333-338. [Online] [accessed 06.12.10]. 10.1016/j.radi.2010.04.003.
15. Fawcett S.L., Barter S.J. The use of gonad shielding in paediatric hip and pelvis radiographs. Br J Radiol 2009, 82:363-370. [Online] [accessed 06.12.10]. 10.1259/bjr/86609718.
16. Heath R., England A., Ward A., Charnock P., Ward M., Evans P., et al. Digital pelvic radiography: increasing distance to reduce dose. Radiol Technol 2011, 83(1):20-28.
17. Egbe N.O., Heaton B., Sharp P.F. A simple phantom study of the effects of dose reduction (by kVp increment) below current dose levels on CR chest image quality. Radiography 2010, 16:327-332. [Online] [accessed 06.12.10]. 10.1016/j.radi.2010.05.004.
18. Kim K.C., Ha Y.C., Kim T.Y., Choi J.A., Koo K.H. Initially missed occult fractures of the proximal femur in elderly patients: implications for need of operation and their morbidity. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2010, 130:915-920. [Online] [accessed 12.12.10]. 10.1007/s00402-010-1105-4.
19. Mazzocchi S., Belli G., Busoni S., Gori C., Menchi I., Salucci P., et al. AEC set-up optimisation with computed radiography imaging. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005, 117(1-3):169-173. [Online] [accessed 06.12.10]. 10.1093/rpd/nci743.
20. Walsh C., Larkin A., Dennan S., O'Reilly G. Exposure variations under error conditions in automatic exposure controlled film-screen projection radiography. Br J Radiol 2004, 77:931-933. [Online] [accessed 06.12.10]. 10.1259/bjr/62185486.
21. Honey I., Hogg P. Guest editorial: balancing radiation dose and image quality in diagnostic imaging. Radiography 2012, 18:e1-e2. [Online] [accessed 19.04.12]. 10.1016/j.radi.2011.10.005.
22. Bomanji J.B., Hyder S.W., Gaze M.N., Gacinovic S., Costa D.C., Coulter C., et al. Functional imaging as an aid to decision-making in metastatic paraganglioma. Br J Radiol 2001, 74:266-269.
23. Hart D., Hillier M.C., Wall B.F. HPA-RPD-029: doses to patients from radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray imaging procedures in the UK - 2005 review 2007, Health Protection Agency, Chilton.