This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lanhede, B Articles by Månsson, L G Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lanhede, B Articles by Månsson, L G

The influence of different technique factors on image quality of chest radiographs as evaluated by modified CEC image quality criteria

¹Department of Radiation Physics, Göteborg University, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Göteborg, Sweden, ²Department of Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE-413 45 Göteborg, Sweden, ³Department of Radiation Physics, Lund University, Malmö University Hospital, SE-205 02 Malmö, Sweden, ⁴Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Malmö University Hospital, SE-205 02 Malmö, Sweden and ⁵GSF-National Research Center for Enviroment and Health, D-857 64 Neuherberg, Germany^,

Correspondence: Birgitta Lanhede, Department of Radiation Physics, Norrlands Universitetssjukhus, SE-901 89 Umeå, Sweden

The Commission of the European Communities (CEC) research project "Predictivity and optimisation in medical radiation protection" addressed fundamental operational limitations in existing radiation protection mechanisms. The first part of the project aimed at investigating (1) whether the CEC image quality criteria could be used for optimization of a radiographic process and (2) whether significant differences in image quality based on these criteria could be detected in a controlled project with well known physical and technical parameters. In the present study, chest radiographs on film were produced using healthy volunteers. Four physical/technical parameters were varied in a carefully controlled manner: tube voltage (102 kVp and 141 kVp), nominal speed class (160 and 320), maximum film density (1.3 and 1.8) and method of scatter reduction (grid (R=12) and air gap). The air kerma at the entrance surface was measured for all patients and the risk-related dose H_Golem, based on calculated organ-equivalent dose conversion coefficients and the measured entrance air kerma values, was calculated. Image quality was evaluated by a group of European expert radiologists using a modified version of the CEC quality criteria. For the two density levels, density level 1.8 was significantly better than 1.3 but at the cost of a higher patient radiation exposure. The correlation between the number of fulfilled quality criteria and H_Golem was generally poor. An air gap technique resulted in lower doses than scatter reduction with a grid but provided comparable image quality. The criteria can be used to highlight optimum radiographic technique in terms of image quality and patient dose, although not unambiguously. A recommendation for good radiographic technique based on a compromise between image quality and risk-related radiation dose to the patient is to use 141 kVp, an air gap, a screen–film system with speed 320 and an optical density of 1.8.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M Bath and L G Mansson Visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis: a non-parametric rank-invariant statistical method for image quality evaluation Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2007; 80(951): 169 - 176. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G McVey The effect of phantom type, beam quality, field size and field position on X-ray scattering simulated using Monte Carlo techniques Br. J. Radiol., February 1, 2006; 79(938): 130 - 141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Borjesson, M. Hakansson, M. Bath, S. Kheddache, S. Svensson, A. Tingberg, A. Grahn, M. Ruschin, B. Hemdal, S. Mattsson, et al. A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 45 - 52. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Tingberg, M. Bath, M. Hakansson, J. Medin, J. Besjakov, M. Sandborg, G. Alm-Carlsson, S. Mattsson, and L. G. Mansson Evaluation of image quality of lumbar spine images: a comparison between FFE and VGA Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 53 - 61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Tingberg, F. Eriksson, J. Medin, J. Besjakov, M. Bath, M. Hakansson, M. Sandborg, A. Almen, B. Lanhede, G. Alm-Carlsson, et al. Inter-observer variation in masked and unmasked images for quality evaluation of clinical radiographs Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 62 - 68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Tingberg and D. Sjostrom Optimisation of image plate radiography with respect to tube voltage Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 286 - 293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Grahn, B. Hemdal, I. Andersson, M. Ruschin, A. Thilander-Klang, S. Borjesson, A. Tingberg, S. Mattsson, M. Hakansson, M. Bath, et al. Clinical evaluation of a new set of image quality criteria for mammography Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 389 - 394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Tingberg, C Herrmann, B Lanhede, A Almen, M Sandborg, G McVey, S Mattsson, W Panzer, J Besjakov, L G Mansson, et al. Influence of the characteristic curve on the clinical image quality of lumbar spine and chest radiographs Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2004; 77(915): 204 - 215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]