Skip Navigation

Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005 114(1-3):236-239; doi:10.1093/rpd/nch548
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Doyle, P.
Right arrow Articles by Martin, C. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Doyle, P.
Right arrow Articles by Martin, C. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

Optimising automatic exposure control in computed radiography and the impact on patient dose

P. Doyle*, D. Gentle and C. J. Martin

Health Physics, Department of Clinical Physics and Bio-Engineering, Gartnavel Royal Hospital, Glasgow G12 OXH, UK

* Corresponding author: philip.doyle{at}northglasgow.scot.nhs.uk

Automatic exposure controls (AECs) used with computed radiography (CR) equipment need to be set for a constant signal level in the resultant images. The response varies with the energy of the X-ray beam in a different way from conventional film screen combinations. Dose to the imaging receptor has been employed in adjustment of the AECs for varying exposure conditions for CR systems installed in hospitals in the west of Scotland. However, other parameters could potentially be applied. In this study, three quantities have been investigated for use in setting the AEC function: the exposure indicator defined by the CR manufacturer, dose to the image receptor and image noise. Experiences gained in setting up the systems are described and results of a patient dose survey are reported.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
C S MOORE, A W BEAVIS, and J R SAUNDERSON
Investigation of optimum X-ray beam tube voltage and filtration for chest radiography with a computed radiography system
Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2008; 81(970): 771 - 777.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
I. A. Tsalafoutas, G. A. Blastaris, A. S. Moutsatsos, P. S. Chios, and E. P. Efstathopoulos
Correlation of image quality with exposure index and processing protocol in a computed radiography system
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, June 1, 2008; 130(2): 162 - 171.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. K. Stewart, K. M. Kanal, J. R. Perdue, and F. A. Mann
Computed Radiography Dose Data Mining and Surveillance as an Ongoing Quality Assurance Improvement Process
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2007; 189(1): 7 - 11.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.