BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Colligan, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Mills, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Colligan, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Mills, J. A.

The British Journal of Radiology, Vol 70, Issue 840 1274-1279, Copyright © 1997 by British Institute of Radiology


ARTICLES

A philosophical approach to treatment machine maintenance and breakdown

SJ Colligan and JA Mills
Department of Clinical Physics and Bioengineering, Walsgrave Hospital, Coventry, UK.

Planned preventative maintenance (PPM), quality control (QC) checks and breakdown all contribute to the down-time of a radiotherapy treatment machine. Low levels of machine availability are unacceptable both clinically and financially. Clinical data demonstrate that, for many tumours, interruptions to treatment will result in reduced local control. Reductions to the gaps in treatment can be achieved by patient interchange between machines. Maintaining the maximum possible machine availability will reduce the potential for errors associated with the transfer of patients between machines, and reduce the cost of treatment. Practices for routine PPM and QC vary between hospitals. In this report, a rationale for breakdown and maintenance will be described. Based on the faults experienced on a Philips SL 75-5 and a Philips SL25 over a period of 3 years, the workload associated with routine maintenance and quality control are presented and the additional work associated with breakdown discussed. Faults have been categorized on a scale between catastrophe and maintainability. A demonstration of how this analysis can be used to assess the cost-benefits of proposed changes in working patterns by the extension or reduction of maintenance periods is provided. The results indicated that no gain would be made in changing from a 1-day to a 2-day per month PPM schedule.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 1997 by the British Institute of Radiology.