Comparison of conventional hand examination on six optimised DR systems

Helle Precht; Claus Bjørn Outzen; Martin Weber Kusk; Malene Bisgaard; D. Waaler

doi:10.1093/rpd/ncab067

Comparison of conventional hand examination on six optimised DR systems

Helle Precht
, Claus Bjørn Outzen
, Martin Weber Kusk
, Malene Bisgaard
, D. Waaler

University of Southern Denmark
Sydvestjysk Sygehus
Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges in comparing digital radiography (DR) systems from different vendors for various combinations of exposure factors in posterior–anterior hand radiographs. Image quality was evaluated for a range of tube voltages and tube current-time products using a technical contrast-detail (CDRAD) phantom and an anthropomorphic hand phantom. 900 technical CDRAD images were analysed providing quality figures of merit (IQFinv) and two experienced reporting radiographers using visual grading analysis (VGA) scored 108 anthropomorphic images. This study demonstrates the differences between the DR systems included. When compensating for variations in dose, Canon showed superior results for technical image quality and Fuji for visual image quality for a standard dose point at DR hand examination (ln(DAP) 1.1, 50 kV and 2.5 mAs).

Original language	English
Journal	Radiation Protection Dosimetry
Pages (from-to)	27-35
ISSN	0144-8420
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncab067
Publication status	Published - 2021

Keywords

radiography

Access to Document

10.1093/rpd/ncab067

Sammenligning af 7 optimerede DR systemer
Precht, H. (Principle researcher) & Outzen, C. B. (Co-researcher)
15/08/12 → 01/06/15
Project: Research

Cite this

@article{2949bcac6b634d58a1803812456c0b84,

title = "Comparison of conventional hand examination on six optimised DR systems",

abstract = "The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges in comparing digital radiography (DR) systems from different vendors for various combinations of exposure factors in posterior–anterior hand radiographs. Image quality was evaluated for a range of tube voltages and tube current-time products using a technical contrast-detail (CDRAD) phantom and an anthropomorphic hand phantom. 900 technical CDRAD images were analysed providing quality figures of merit (IQFinv) and two experienced reporting radiographers using visual grading analysis (VGA) scored 108 anthropomorphic images. This study demonstrates the differences between the DR systems included. When compensating for variations in dose, Canon showed superior results for technical image quality and Fuji for visual image quality for a standard dose point at DR hand examination (ln(DAP) 1.1, 50 kV and 2.5 mAs).",

keywords = "radiography",

author = "Helle Precht and Outzen, \{Claus Bj{\o}rn\} and Kusk, \{Martin Weber\} and Malene Bisgaard and D. Waaler",

year = "2021",

doi = "10.1093/rpd/ncab067",

language = "English",

pages = "27--35",

journal = "Radiation Protection Dosimetry",

issn = "0144-8420",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of conventional hand examination on six optimised DR systems

AU - Precht, Helle

AU - Outzen, Claus Bjørn

AU - Kusk, Martin Weber

AU - Bisgaard, Malene

AU - Waaler, D.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges in comparing digital radiography (DR) systems from different vendors for various combinations of exposure factors in posterior–anterior hand radiographs. Image quality was evaluated for a range of tube voltages and tube current-time products using a technical contrast-detail (CDRAD) phantom and an anthropomorphic hand phantom. 900 technical CDRAD images were analysed providing quality figures of merit (IQFinv) and two experienced reporting radiographers using visual grading analysis (VGA) scored 108 anthropomorphic images. This study demonstrates the differences between the DR systems included. When compensating for variations in dose, Canon showed superior results for technical image quality and Fuji for visual image quality for a standard dose point at DR hand examination (ln(DAP) 1.1, 50 kV and 2.5 mAs).

AB - The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges in comparing digital radiography (DR) systems from different vendors for various combinations of exposure factors in posterior–anterior hand radiographs. Image quality was evaluated for a range of tube voltages and tube current-time products using a technical contrast-detail (CDRAD) phantom and an anthropomorphic hand phantom. 900 technical CDRAD images were analysed providing quality figures of merit (IQFinv) and two experienced reporting radiographers using visual grading analysis (VGA) scored 108 anthropomorphic images. This study demonstrates the differences between the DR systems included. When compensating for variations in dose, Canon showed superior results for technical image quality and Fuji for visual image quality for a standard dose point at DR hand examination (ln(DAP) 1.1, 50 kV and 2.5 mAs).

KW - radiography

U2 - 10.1093/rpd/ncab067

DO - 10.1093/rpd/ncab067

M3 - Journal article

SN - 0144-8420

SP - 27

EP - 35

JO - Radiation Protection Dosimetry

JF - Radiation Protection Dosimetry

ER -

Comparison of conventional hand examination on six optimised DR systems

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Projects

Sammenligning af 7 optimerede DR systemer

Cite this