System for verifiable CT radiation dose optimization based on image quality. Part II. Process control system

Radiology

Volumn 269, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 177-185

  Larson, David B ^a   Malarik, Remo J ^a   Hall, Seth M ^a   Podberesky, Daniel J ^a  

^a CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

WATER;

ABDOMEN; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CHILD; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM EXAMINATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INFANT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOISE; PELVIC EXAMINATION; PREDICTION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RADIATION DOSE; SCHOOL CHILD; SIZE SPECIFIC DOSE ESTIMATE; THORAX EXAMINATION; WATER AND WATER RELATED PHENOMENA;

HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; OHIO; PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84884696486     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13122321     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4(5):272-284. (Pubitemid 46671375)
2. White Paper. Initiative to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from medical imaging. Food and Drug Administration Web site. http://www.fda.gov/ downloads/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationSafety/RadiationDoseReduction/ UCM200087.pdf. Published November 2010. Accessed October 6, 2012.
3. Brenner DJ, Hricak H. Radiation exposure from medical imaging: time to regulate? JAMA 2010;304(2):208-209.
4. Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Bulas D, et al. Image Gently 5 years later: what goals remain to be accomplished in radiation protection for children? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(3):477-479.
5. Paterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF. Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176(2):297-301. (Pubitemid 32105629)
6. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA 2009;301(5):500-507.
7. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(22):2078-2086.
8. Golding SJ. Radiation exposure in CT: what is the professionally responsible approach? Radiology 2010;255(3):683-686.
9. Kanal KM, Vavilala MS, Raelson C, et al. Variation in pediatric head CT imaging protocols in Washington state. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8(4):242-250.
10. Calvert C, Strauss KJ, Mooney DP. Variation in computed tomography radiation dose in community hospitals. J Pediatr Surg 2012;47(6):1167-1169.
11. Goske MJ, Strauss KJ, Coombs LP, et al. Diagnostic reference ranges for pediatric abdominal CT. Radiology 2013 Mar 19. [Epub ahead of print]
12. Larson DB, Wang LL, Podberesky DJ, Goske MJ. System for verifiable CT radiation dose optimization based on image quality. Part I. Optimization model. Radiology 2013;269(1):167-176.
13. Berwick DM. Controlling variation in health care: a consultation from Walter Shewhart. Med Care 1991;29(12):1212-1225.
14. Nolan TW, Provost LP. Understanding variation. Qual Prog 1990;23(5):70-78.
15. Langley GJ, Moen RD, Nolan KM, Nolan TW, Norman CL, Provost LP. Skills to support improvement. In: The improvement guide. 2nd ed. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey Bass, 2012; 27-47.
16. Deming WE. Principles for transformation. In: Out of the crisis. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study, 1986; 18-96.
17. Langley GJ, Moen RD, Nolan KM, Nolan TW, Norman CL, Provost LP. Implementing a change. In: The improvement guide. 2nd ed. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey Bass, 2012;173-194.
18. Stevenson WJ. Quality control. In: Operations management. 11th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2012; 418-471.
19. Provost LP, Murray SK. Understanding variation using Shewhart charts. In: The health care data guide. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey Bass, 2011; 149-191.
20. Provost LP, Murray SK. Learning from variation in data. In: The health care data guide. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey Bass, 2011; 107-148.
21. .Menke J. Comparison of different body size parameters for individual dose adaptation in body CT of adults. Radiology 2005;236(2):565-571. (Pubitemid 41023441)
22. Boone J, Strauss KJ, Cody DD, McCollough CH, McNitt-Gray MF, Toth TL. Size-Specific Dose Estimates (SSDE) in Pediatric and Adult Body CT Examinations. AAPM Report No 204. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT-204.pdf. Published 2011. Accessed October 6, 2012.
23. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: Topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. RadioGraphics 2002;22(6):1541-1553.
24. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230(3):619-628. (Pubitemid 38252854)
25. Boone JM. What parameters are most accurate in predicting appropriate technique factors for CT scanning? Radiology 2005;236(2):377-378. (Pubitemid 41023415)
26. Dose Index Registry. American College of Radiology Web site. https://nrdr.acr.org/Portal/DIR/Main/page.aspx. Accessed January 7, 2013.
27. Christianson O, Li X, Frush D, Samei E. Automated size-specific CT dose monitoring program: assessing variability in CT dose. Med Phys 2012;39(11):7131-7139.
28. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Reference levels and achievable doses in medical and dental imaging. In: Recommendations for the United States National Council on Radiation Protection. Report No. 172. Bethesda, Md: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 2012.
29. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007;37(2-4):1-332.