BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (2006) 79, 968-980
© 2006 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/93277434
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow An erratum has been published
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shrimpton, P C
Right arrow Articles by Dunn, M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shrimpton, P C
Right arrow Articles by Dunn, M

National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003

P C Shrimpton, PhD 1 M C Hillier, HNC 1 M A Lewis, MSc 2 and M Dunn, MSc 3

1 Radiation Protection Division (formerly NRPB), Health Protection Agency, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0RQ, 2 ImPACT, Department of Medical Physics, St George's Hospital, London SW17 0QT, 3 Medical Physics Department, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK


Figure 1
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 1. Analysis by examination type and scanner technology(single (SSCT) or multislice (MSCT)) of mean values of CTDIw (±2 SE) for adult patients from UK 2003 review and comparison with survey data from Europe published in 1999 (EU99) [2].

 

Figure 2
View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 2. Analysis by examination type and scanner technology(single (SSCT) or multislice (MSCT)) of mean values of CTDIvol (±2 SE) for adult patients from UK 2003 review and comparison with survey data from Europe published in 2004 (EU04) [18].

 

Figure 3
View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 3. Analysis by examination type and scanner technology(single (SSCT) or multislice (MSCT)) of mean values of DLP (±2 SE) for adult patients from UK 2003 review and comparison with survey data from Europe published in 1999 (EU99) [2] and 2004 (EU04) [18].

 

Figure 4
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 4. Analysis by examination type and scanner technology(single (SSCT) or multislice (MSCT)) of mean values of CTDIw (±2 SE) for paediatric patients from UK 2003 review and comparison with survey data from Europe published in 2000 (EU00) [32].

 

Figure 5
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 5. Analysis by examination type and scanner technology(single (SSCT) or multislice (MSCT)) of mean values of CTDIvol (±2 SE) for paediatric patients from UK 2003 review and comparison with survey data from Europe published in 2004 (EU04) [18].

 

Figure 6
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 6. Analysis by examination type and scanner technology(single (SSCT) or multislice (MSCT)) of mean values of dose–length product (DLP) (±2 SE) for paediatric patients from UK 2003 review and comparison with survey data from Europe published in 2000 (EU00) [32] and 2004 (EU04) [18].

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2006 by the British Institute of Radiology.