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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kulasekere, Ravi, Moran, Jean M., Fraass, Benedick A., Roberson, Peter L.
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