Thumbnail
Access Restriction
Open

Author Szczykutowicz, T. ♦ Rubert, N. ♦ Ranallo, F.
Source United States Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Content type Text
Language English
Subject Keyword APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES ♦ RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY ♦ BIOMEDICAL RADIOGRAPHY ♦ CHEST ♦ DIAGNOSIS ♦ EQUIPMENT ♦ FINANCING ♦ IMAGES ♦ RADIATION DOSES ♦ REVIEWS ♦ SKELETON
Abstract Purpose: A framework for explaining differences in image quality to non-technical audiences in medial imaging is needed. Currently, this task is something that is learned “on the job.” The lack of a formal methodology for communicating optimal acquisition parameters into the clinic effectively mitigates many technological advances. As a community, medical physicists need to be held responsible for not only advancing image science, but also for ensuring its proper use in the clinic. This work outlines a framework that bridges the gap between the results from quantitative image quality metrics like detectability, MTF, and NPS and their effect on specific anatomical structures present in diagnostic imaging tasks. Methods: Specific structures of clinical importance were identified for a body, an extremity, a chest, and a temporal bone protocol. Using these structures, quantitative metrics were used to identify the parameter space that should yield optimal image quality constrained within the confines of clinical logistics and dose considerations. The reading room workflow for presenting the proposed changes for imaging each of these structures is presented. The workflow consists of displaying images for physician review consisting of different combinations of acquisition parameters guided by quantitative metrics. Examples of using detectability index, MTF, NPS, noise and noise non-uniformity are provided. During review, the physician was forced to judge the image quality solely on those features they need for diagnosis, not on the overall “look” of the image. Results: We found that in many cases, use of this framework settled mis-agreements between physicians. Once forced to judge images on the ability to detect specific structures inter reader agreement was obtained. Conclusion: This framework will provide consulting, research/industrial, or in-house physicists with clinically relevant imaging tasks to guide reading room image review. This framework avoids use of the overall “look” or “feel” to dictate acquisition parameter selection. Equipment grants GE Healthcare.
ISSN 00942405
Educational Use Research
Learning Resource Type Article
Publisher Date 2015-06-15
Publisher Place United States
Journal Medical Physics
Volume Number 42
Issue Number 6


Open content in new tab

   Open content in new tab