Image quality and dose in mammography in 17 countries in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe: Results from IAEA projects

Ciraj-Bjelac, Olivera; Avramova-Cholakova, S.; Beganović, Adnan; Economides, S.; Faj, Dario; Gershan, Vesna; Grupetta, E.; Kharita, M.H.; Milaković, Milomir; Milu, C; Muhogora, W.E.; Muthuvelu, P.; Oola, Samuel; Setayeshi, Saeed; Schandorf, Cyril; Ursulean, Ion; Videnović, Ivan R.; Zaman, Areesha; Ziliukas, J.; Rehani, Madan M.

doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.05.026

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is why sometimes in some institutions there is a possibility of failure to implement a complete quality control of a mammography system. Regular quality controls of mammography units in some countries contributed to decreasing of patient doses and improvement of quality of mammographic images (Maccia et al, 1995;Zdesar, 2000;Vassileva et al, 2005;Ciraj-Bjelac et al, 2011) and improvement of functioning of a mammography unit (Zoetelief et al, 1992 …”

Section: Quality Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Application of Mean Glandular Dose and Factors on Which It Depends to Patients of Various Age Groups

Kunosić¹

2012

Mammography - Recent Advances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Quality Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Application of Mean Glandular Dose and Factors on Which It Depends to Patients of Various Age Groups

Kunosić¹

2012

Mammography - Recent Advances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A total of 257 responses was received from the following 25 countries arranged alphabetically. Numbers in parentheses show the number of responses received from each country: Afghanistan (1), Albania (1), Algeria (6), Armenia (1), Bosnia and Herzegovina (5) (9), United Arab Emirates (40), and Zimbabwe (1). A total of 44 responses (17.1%) was received from developed countries, namely Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Malta, Slovakia, and Slovenia, and the remaining 213 (82.9%) were received from developing countries.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Projects include, among others, training, assessment of the radiation safety situation in each country or region as well as dissemination of information and provision of support to improve the existing situations. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Another method that has been utilized is providing support through publication of guidance and safety reports. One would suppose that, since regulations and guidance documents have been published for so long, their contribution to enhancing radiation safety would be undisputed and by now it would have been quantitatively known how much radiation protection has benefited due to regulations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on impact of regulations on radiation safety and development of radiation safety culture in 25 countries

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this work was to assess the: (a) impact of regulations on radiation safety and development of radiation safety culture, (b) perceived safety level in the participating facilities, (c) future needs regarding strengthening of regulations, patient dose consideration, and exposure tracking, in different countries around the world. Appropriate questionnaires probing the above-mentioned themes were sent to radiologic professionals working in healthcare facilities. A total of 257 responses from 25 countries were received and analyzed. Average scores for the three different sections/themes of the questionnaire ranged from 64.6% to 74.9%. Higher scores indicated stronger agreement of the survey participants with the theme in question. Statistical comparisons among different professional groups revealed that professionals in developing countries perceived regulations to be significantly more important for improving safety than their counterparts in developed countries did. Radiologic professionals believe that regulation enhances radiation safety and the development of safety culture. However, there is still room for improvement regarding the implementation of regulatory tools. Safety levels were perceived to be satisfactory, and future needs point toward strengthening of regulations regarding patient dose control, patient dose consideration, and patient exposure tracking. The results of this study should be interpreted keeping possible selection bias in view.

show abstract

“…A quantitative assessment of dose is well-defined and straightforward, as there are well-developed dosimetry protocols [2,8]. Although it is difficult to establish a correlation between clinical and physical image quality [1,5], the results of the image quality assessment using test objects presented here were of importance for the comparison of different mammography units, different technologies and for the establishment of minimal standards in mammography. There was no significant correlation between image quality and MGD as presented in Figure 6.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Quality Assurance (QA) in mammography has received increasing attention as an essential element of a successful clinical mammography and breast cancer screening programme [1, 5,6]. QA requires multidisciplinary approach, continuous education, evaluation, effectiveness and detriment minimization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mammography in Serbia: Image Quality and Radiation Dose

Rafajlovic¹,

Arandjic²,

Bozovic³

et al. 2016

RAD Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The purpose of this study is to investigate the radiation dose and technic in Serbia after two years of implementation of the breast screening programme. A total of 186 mammography units, including Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM), (SFM) units were used in the patient Dose (MGD), was assessed for the standard breast, while image quality was evaluated in terms of spatial resolution, threshold contrast visibility and Contrast to (1.8±0.94) mGy, (1.3±0.51) and (1.7±0.64) for CR, FFDM and SFM, respectively. Spatial resolution was better than lp/mm only for 3/186 (1.6%) units. In 34/186 (18%) units, spatial resolution was less tha contrast visibility was better than 1.2 in 41/186 (22%). initial implementation at the beginning of the population establish an effective system of regular and periodic mammograms with minimal possible radiation dose to population

show abstract

Image quality and dose in mammography in 17 countries in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe: Results from IAEA projects

Cited by 18 publications

References 10 publications

An Analysis of Application of Mean Glandular Dose and Factors on Which It Depends to Patients of Various Age Groups

An Analysis of Application of Mean Glandular Dose and Factors on Which It Depends to Patients of Various Age Groups

Survey on impact of regulations on radiation safety and development of radiation safety culture in 25 countries

Mammography in Serbia: Image Quality and Radiation Dose

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About