Challenges for pediatric radiology using Computed Radiography

Willis, Charles E.; Parker, Bruce R.; Orand, Michael; Wagner, Milton L.

doi:10.1007/bf03168290

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Technologists are discouraged from making drastic adjustments to the image at the workstation. 3 The PS display is not designed for primary interpretation: the image is down-sampled for display, and the monitor luminance is not strictly controlled. Technologists are trained to recognize anatomy, not pathology, and are as likely to obscure important clinical features as to enhance them, especially when the display does not match the appearance on diagnostic workstations.…”

Section: The Processing Stationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Reject Analysis Necessary after Converting to Computed Radiography?

Honea

Blado²,

Ma³

2002

Journal of Digital Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reject analysis is an accepted standard of practice for quality assurance in conventional radiology. The need for reject analysis has been challenged by the introduction of computed radiography (CR) because of low reported reject rates and because criteria for improperly exposed images were lacking. Most CR systems include quality control (QC) workstations that are capable of modifying the appearance of images before release, and also of deleting poor images before they are analyzed. Texas Children's Hospital has been using computed radiography since October 1995, and now conducts essentially filmless imaging operations using a large-scale picture archival and communications system (PACS) with fourteen CR units. The QC workstation is a key element of our CR operation; however, the extensive software tools of the workstation are limited in terms of avoiding repeated examinations. Neither the QC workstation nor the PACS itself is designed to support reject analysis, so our task was to design a system that accommodates identification, isolation, and archiving of repeated examinations, making use of our electronic imaging systems. We had already developed transcription codes for our radiologist's examination critique, so we adopted these as codes for rejected images. The technologist at the QC workstation appends the critique code to patient demographic information, modifies other fields to indicate that the image is rejected, and archives as usual. Modified routing tables prevent the release of rejected images but ensure they are available for review. Our frequency and reasons for repeated examinations are comparable to other reports of reject analysis in the literature. The most frequent cause of a repeated examination is mis-positioning. The process of developing the method for capturing repeat, collecting the data, and analyzing it is only one-half of the battle; to achieve an improvement in services, it is necessary to feed back the results to management and staff and to implement training as indicated. It is our intention to share our results with PACS and CR vendors in the hope that they will incorporate some mechanisms for reject analysis into the design of their systems.

show abstract

Section: The Processing Stationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Reject Analysis Necessary after Converting to Computed Radiography?

Honea

Blado²,

Ma³

2002

Journal of Digital Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Radiosensitivity of children: potential for overexposure in CR and DR and magnitude of doses in ordinary radiographic examinations

Don

2004

Pediatr Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The linear, no-threshold model is currently the best estimate of risk from radiation exposure with no level below which radiation is safe. Plain-film radiography has a much lower patient dose than CT or fluoroscopy. With the advent of computed radiography (CR) the dose to patients is higher than screen-film radiography and overexposure is quite common. Task-oriented adjustment of technique, commonly used in CT, is rarely used in CR. Exposure reduction is important in CR as research indicates an increased risk of childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia from plain-film studies and an increased risk of fatal breast cancer from scoliosis series. Future needs include better documentation of the dose the patient receives, dose-based research on the radiation risk, and accreditation in CR and digital radiography for public assurance.

show abstract

Challenges for pediatric radiology using Computed Radiography

Cited by 2 publications

References 5 publications

Is Reject Analysis Necessary after Converting to Computed Radiography?

Is Reject Analysis Necessary after Converting to Computed Radiography?

Radiosensitivity of children: potential for overexposure in CR and DR and magnitude of doses in ordinary radiographic examinations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About