Relationship between phantom failure rates and radiation dose in mammography accreditation

被引:10
作者
Haus, AG
Yaffe, MJ
Feig, SA
Hendrick, RE
Butler, PA
Wilcox, PA
Bansal, S
机构
[1] Sunnybrook & Womens Coll, Hlth Sci Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Mt Sinai Sch Med, New York, NY USA
[3] Northwestern Univ, Sch Med, Chicago, IL USA
关键词
mammography accreditation; mammography dose; mammography image quality; mammography phantom;
D O I
10.1118/1.1408283
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program (ACR MAP) reviews both clinical mammograms and a phantom image to assess clinical and technical quality from each mammography unit. The phantom contains details representing fibers (speculations), speck groups (microcalcifications), and masses. The depiction of these structures by the mammographic system is scored by medical physicists. The phantom image is taken using the facility's exposure technique for a 4.2-cm thick breast of average composition. The mean glandular dose (MGD) is determined from a set of thermoluminescent dosimeters placed on top of the chest wall edge of the phantom. Phantom scores and MGD data collected from 1993 to 1999 based on 31 535 unit evaluations are presented in this paper. The relationship between the failure rate for phantom image quality and MGD has been analyzed. While over all doses the phantom failure rate was 11%, for doses of 0.26 to 0.50 mGy the failure rate was 43%. The phantom failure rate fell continuously to about 6% for MGDs in the range of 1.51-2.0 mGy. With further increases in dose, failure rates began to rise. Factors that may account for these results are presented and discussed. (C) 2001 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:2297 / 2301
页数:5
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], SEMIN BREAST DIS
[2]  
BARNES GT, 1999, SYLLABUS CATHEGORICA, P41
[3]   Reasons for failure of a mammography unit at clinical image review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program [J].
Bassett, LW ;
Farria, DM ;
Bansal, S ;
Farquhar, MA ;
Wilcox, PA ;
Feig, SA .
RADIOLOGY, 2000, 215 (03) :698-702
[4]  
Botsco M, 1999, MAMMOGRAPHY QUALITY
[5]   The effects of reduced film granularity on mammographic image quality [J].
Bunch, PC .
PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING - MEDICAL IMAGING 1997, 1997, 3032 :302-317
[6]  
CACAK RK, 1991, RADIOLOGY, V181, P288
[7]  
COHEN J, 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA, P209
[8]   Screen-film and digital mammography - Image quality and radiation dose considerations [J].
Haus, AG ;
Yaffe, MJ .
RADIOLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2000, 38 (04) :871-+
[9]  
HAUS AG, 1999, SYLLABUS CATEGORICAL, P59
[10]   INCONSISTENCIES IN MAMMOGRAPHIC PHANTOMS USED FOR ACR ACCREDITATION [J].
HENDRICK, RE .
RADIOLOGY, 1992, 183 (02) :581-583