Skip Navigation


Radiation Protection Dosimetry Advance Access originally published online on February 3, 2006
Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005 117(1-3):288-290; doi:10.1093/rpd/nci741
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
117/1-3/288    most recent
nci741v1
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 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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sheahan, N. F.
Right arrow Articles by Malone, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sheahan, N. F.
Right arrow Articles by Malone, J. F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Commissioning and quality assurance protocol for dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) systems

N. F. Sheahan, A. Dowling*, G. O'Reilly and J. F. Malone

Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, St James's Hospital, Dublin 8, UK

* Corresponding author: adowling{at}stjames.ie

This study reports on the development and evaluation of a protocol for testing DEXA systems, which can be incorporated into a routine medical physics/engineering service. Methodologies are reported for (1) scatter measurement, (2) estimation of reference dose and (3) enquiry into potential sources of overexposure. Results show that fan-beam and cone-beam systems require shielding if the walls or operator are within 1 m of the table. Patient reference dose was estimated using the dose–area product (DAP). This varied over an order of magnitude from 2 to 36 mGy cm2 in the range of systems studied. The inquiry into potential sources of overexposure revealed some weaknesses in current practise including a design which prevents the inclusion of DAP metres; beam non-uniformity; incorrect specification of patient dose and the risk of overexposure when tube operates during patient positioning.


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
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
U. O'Connor, A. Dowling, A Larkin, N. Sheahan, L. Gray, A. Gallagher, G. O'Reilly, A. Kosunen, U. Zdesar, and J. F. Malone
DEVELOPMENT OF TRAINING SYLLABI FOR RADIATION PROTECTION AND QUALITY ASSURANCE OF DUAL-ENERGY X-RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY (DXA) SYSTEMS
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, April 8, 2008; (2008) ncn088v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
A. Larkin, N. Sheahan, U. O'Connor, L. Gray, A. Dowling, E. Vano, P. Torbica, D. Salat, A. Schreiner, V. Neofotistou, et al.
QA/ACCEPTANCE TESTING OF DEXA X-RAY SYSTEMS USED IN BONE MINERAL DENSITOMETRY
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, April 1, 2008; (2008) ncn086v1.
[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.