BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

First published online September 17, 2007
British Journal of Radiology (2007) 80, 902-910
© 2007 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/88577258

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
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 Mutch, S J
Right arrow Articles by Wentworth, S D P
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mutch, S J
Right arrow Articles by Wentworth, S D P

Imaging the neonate in the incubator: an investigation of the technical, radiological and nursing issues

S J Mutch, BSc(HONS), MSc, MIPEM 1 and S D P Wentworth, BSc(HONS), PhD, MIPEM 2

1 Department of Medical Physics & Clinical Engineering, The Churchill Hospital, Old Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7L J, 2 Department of Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering, Rehabilitation Engineering Unit, Rookwood Hospital, Llandaff, Cardiff CF5 2YN, UK


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

 
Figure 1. General set-up for the incubator radiological imaging performance measurements. A fixed X-ray tube focus to phantom surface distance (FSD) of 90 cm was set for all incubators. Image quality was assessed for both imaging methods, namely with the image plate directly under the phantom (neonate) or when the plate is in the tray/slot mechanism.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 2. Threshold detection index diagram showing the image quality results from exposing the plate by the direct method(plate under phantom/neonate) for each incubator.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 3. Threshold detection index diagram showing the image quality results when the plate is exposed in the incubator tray/slot device for each incubator.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 4. Threshold detection index diagram showing the average image quality from all incubators for each method of plate exposure.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 5. Perceived risk rating of nurses using and not using the X-ray tray or slot.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 6. Perceived risk rating of radiographers using and not using the X-ray tray or slot.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (101K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 7. Image artefact generated by a non-uniform mattress. Such materials must be carefully considered when using incubator X-ray trays for imaging.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2007 by the British Institute of Radiology.