Thumbnail
Access Restriction
Open

Author Yasumatsu, S. ♦ Iwase, K. ♦ Shimizu, Y. ♦ Tanaka, N. ♦ Morishita, J.
Source United States Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Content type Text
Language English
Subject Keyword INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ♦ APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES ♦ BEAMS ♦ INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION ♦ KERMA ♦ MANUFACTURERS ♦ RADIATION DOSES
Abstract Purpose: The exposure index (EI) proposed by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62494-1 is expected to be utilized as a standard dose index by every manufacturer. The IEC recommended the usage of RQA5 for the EI. However, X-ray beam qualities, particularly in clinical practices, vary depending on the examination objects and exposure conditions, including usage of anti-scatter grids. We investigated the effects of the X-ray beam qualities other than RQA5 on the EI. Methods: The Xray beam qualities of RQA3, 5, 7, and 9 in IEC 61267 Ed. 1.0 were adopted in a computed radiography system. A uniform exposure without objects was performed to measure the exposure indicators (S values) and air kerma (K). The relational equations between the S values and K were derived for the determination of the EI values. The EI values for RQA3, 7, and 9 were compared to those for RQA5 at the fixed S values of 100, 200, 400, and 600. Finally, the half-value layers (HVLs) using four grids (ratio 6:1, 8:1, 10:1, and 12:1) for the RQA5 X-ray were compared to those with RQA3–9. Results: The EI values for RQA3, 7, and 9 were up to 35.3%, 11.8%, and 38.7% higher, respectively, than that for RQA5 at the S value of 600. The HVLs without grids and with various grids for RQA5 were 6.85 mm Al. and in the range of 6.94–7.29 mm Al. (ΔHVL: up to 0.44 mm Al.), respectively. This variation in the HVLs with grids was smaller than that observed for RQA3–9 (ΔHVL: 2.0–7.5 mm Al.). Conclusion: Although the usage of grids may not greatly affect the EI, the X-ray beam quality for the determination of the EI cannot be ignored in the clinical evaluation of the dose index.
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