Cargando…
Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification
A single calibration film method was evaluated for use with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy film quality assurance measurements. The single‐film method has the potential advantages of exposure simplicity, less media consumption, and improved processor quality control. Potential disadvantages i...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5722446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17533325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v7i2.2202 |
_version_ | 1783285016623579136 |
---|---|
author | Kulasekere, Ravi Moran, Jean M. Fraass, Benedick A. Roberson, Peter L. |
author_facet | Kulasekere, Ravi Moran, Jean M. Fraass, Benedick A. Roberson, Peter L. |
author_sort | Kulasekere, Ravi |
collection | PubMed |
description | A single calibration film method was evaluated for use with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy film quality assurance measurements. The single‐film method has the potential advantages of exposure simplicity, less media consumption, and improved processor quality control. Potential disadvantages include cross contamination of film exposure, implementation effort to document delivered dose, and added complication of film response analysis. Film response differences were measured between standard and single‐film calibration methods. Additional measurements were performed to help trace causes for the observed discrepancies. Kodak X‐OmatV (XV) film was found to have greater response variability than extended dose range (EDR) film. We found it advisable for XV film to relate the film response calibration for the single‐film method to a user‐defined optimal calibration geometry. Using a single calibration film exposed at the time of experiment, the total uncertainty of film response was estimated to be [Formula: see text] (1%) for XV (EDR) film at 50 (100) cGy and higher, respectively. PACS numbers: 87.53.‐j, 87.53.Dq |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5722446 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57224462018-04-02 Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification Kulasekere, Ravi Moran, Jean M. Fraass, Benedick A. Roberson, Peter L. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Measurements A single calibration film method was evaluated for use with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy film quality assurance measurements. The single‐film method has the potential advantages of exposure simplicity, less media consumption, and improved processor quality control. Potential disadvantages include cross contamination of film exposure, implementation effort to document delivered dose, and added complication of film response analysis. Film response differences were measured between standard and single‐film calibration methods. Additional measurements were performed to help trace causes for the observed discrepancies. Kodak X‐OmatV (XV) film was found to have greater response variability than extended dose range (EDR) film. We found it advisable for XV film to relate the film response calibration for the single‐film method to a user‐defined optimal calibration geometry. Using a single calibration film exposed at the time of experiment, the total uncertainty of film response was estimated to be [Formula: see text] (1%) for XV (EDR) film at 50 (100) cGy and higher, respectively. PACS numbers: 87.53.‐j, 87.53.Dq John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2006-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5722446/ /pubmed/17533325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v7i2.2202 Text en © 2006 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Measurements Kulasekere, Ravi Moran, Jean M. Fraass, Benedick A. Roberson, Peter L. Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
title | Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
title_full | Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
title_fullStr | Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
title_short | Accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
title_sort | accuracy of rapid radiographic film calibration for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy verification |
topic | Radiation Measurements |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5722446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17533325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v7i2.2202 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kulasekereravi accuracyofrapidradiographicfilmcalibrationforintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyverification AT moranjeanm accuracyofrapidradiographicfilmcalibrationforintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyverification AT fraassbenedicka accuracyofrapidradiographicfilmcalibrationforintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyverification AT robersonpeterl accuracyofrapidradiographicfilmcalibrationforintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyverification |