The construction of the DDQA radiographic phantom allows for a fixed distance between the X-ray source and the image receptor and repeatable geometry ( i.e. The exposure parameters used in this study, 63 kV/8 mA/0.2 s, resulted in an exposure output of 1.138 mGy.
Digora optime dxr 50 psp#
Even though all X-ray units at our institution are inspected annually, we also verified the consistency of the exposure output using the Piranha 557 meter (RTI Electronics, MÖlndal, Sweden) prior to exposing the 30 PSP plates. The Planmeca Intra direct current X-ray unit (Planmeca Oy, Helsinki, Finland) was used to acquire all radiographs. All 30 PSP plates were imaged using the exposure settings of 63 kV/8 mA/0.2 s. The exposure time resulting in seven visible steps was 0.2 s. The phantom was imaged at 63 kV/8 mA and varying exposure times until all seven steps were visible in the stepwedge, thus verifying that the maximum dynamic range was achieved.
6 Prior to imaging the 30 PSP plates, the DDQA radiographic phantom was used to determine the appropriate exposure parameters required to achieve the maximum diagnostic yield from the PSP plate image receptor. The construction of the DDQA phantom has been described in detail by Mah and colleagues. 5ģ0 new DIGORA Optime PSP plates (Soredex/Orion Corp., Helsinki, Finland) were imaged using the Dental Digital Quality Assurance (DDQA) radiographic phantom (Dental Imaging Consultants LLC, San Antonio, TX).
Digora optime dxr 50 update#
Various subject matter experts in the field of dentistry recognize this need and are working to publish a new National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) report for dentistry, NCRP Report SC 4–5: Radiation Protection in Dentistry Supplement: Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Digital Imaging, and Handheld Dental Imaging, which will include an update on digital imaging. 1, 3 Unfortunately, at the present time, a comprehensive resource on digital imaging quality assurance protocols is not available. 3 The findings of Walker et al and Buchanan et al confirm the need for standardized quality assurance procedures in digital imaging. 1 In another quality assurance study, Buchanan and colleagues reported a decrease in spatial resolution detected after 48 clinical uses, a finding that would not have been discovered without quality assurance measures. 1 Additionally, as part of their quality assurance assessment, Walker and colleagues discovered four X-ray units operating with a fluctuation in kilovoltage (kV) exceeding the 10% allowed by law.
4 Therefore, it is not surprising that when evaluating the image quality of digital sensors, Walker and colleagues discovered that the exposure settings being used required adjusting, most required a reduction in exposure, in order to achieve optimum image quality while maintaining appropriate patient dose.
The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements Report 145 states that there must be a written protocol for quality assurance designed for the image receptor system however, no specifics are given in reference to digital imaging.
Digora optime dxr 50 software#
An example of how the settings within a third party software can effect image quality is given in Figure 2. Quality assurance procedures also have to account for third party software when applicable. Quality assurance for digital imaging includes proper function and calibration of the radiographic unit accurate radiographic technique calibration of computer monitors for adequate brightness/contrast and spatial resolution proper software settings ensuring that updates to computer operating systems, software and hardware provide equivalent diagnostic quality consistent calibration of scanners when using a photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plate system and use of a radiographic phantom to monitor diagnostic quality. Figure 1 provides an example of radiographs that are too light in density, simulating underexposure error, due to improper scanner settings. In reality it could be due to inadequate software settings or inadequate scanner settings. For example, the answer to “why is this radiograph too light” is not always due to inadequate exposure settings. 1– 3 The digital imaging chain is complex. Quality assurance guidelines for digital imaging are limited and a general lack of knowledge about quality assurance procedures has been reported.
0 kommentar(er)
