Patient Dose Protocols and Trends in the UK

1995 ◽  
Vol 57 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 359-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
B.F. Wall ◽  
P.C. Shrimpton
Keyword(s):  
2012 ◽  
Vol 85 (1018) ◽  
pp. e957-e958 ◽  
Author(s):  
D Hart ◽  
P C Shrimpton
Keyword(s):  

1995 ◽  
Vol 57 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 359-362
Author(s):  
B.F. Wall ◽  
P.C. Shrimpton
Keyword(s):  

2011 ◽  
Vol 147 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. J. Martin
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 91 (1085) ◽  
pp. 20170834 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R Holroyd ◽  
Sue Edyvean

Objective: To review doses to patients undergoing cervical spine CT examinations in the UK. Methods: A data collection form was developed and distributed to medical physicists and radiographers via e-mail distribution lists. The form requested details of CT scanners, exposure protocols and patient dose index information. Results: Data were received for 73 scanners. It was seen that 97% of scanners used automatic exposure control, and 60% of scanners used an iterative reconstruction technique for cervical spine examinations. The majority of scans were taken at 120 kV. The average patient dose indicators in terms of CT dose index (CTDIvol) ranged from 3.5 to 39.7 mGy (mean value 16.7 mGy), and for the DLP, ranged from 87 to 1030 mGy cm (mean value 379 mGy cm) as quoted for the standard 32 cm phantom. Conclusion: The rounded third quartile value of the mean dose distributions from this study were a CT dose index (CTDIvol) of 20 mGy and a dose–length product of 440 mGy cm as quoted for a 32 cm body phantom. These are significantly higher than those in the 2011 Public Health England CT dose survey when adjusted for phantom size. It is suggested that the existing national diagnostic reference levels for cervical spine CT should be amended, both with the new values and also to quote according to the 32 cm phantom. Advances in knowledge: Proposed new national diagnostic reference levels are presented for cervical spine CT examinations.


2003 ◽  
Vol 76 (906) ◽  
pp. 361-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
D Hart ◽  
B F Wall

Author(s):  
Mark Worrall ◽  
Mike Holubinka ◽  
Glafkos Havariyoun ◽  
Kirsten Hodgson ◽  
Sue Edyvean ◽  
...  

Objectives: To present the results following a UK national patient dose audit of paediatric CT examinations, to propose updated UK national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and to analyse current practice to see if any recommendations can be made to assist with optimisation. Methods: A UK national dose audit was undertaken in 2019 focussing on paediatric CT examinations of the head, chest, abdomen/pelvis and cervical spine using the methods proposed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. The audit pro-forma contained mandatory fields, of which the post-examination dosimetry (CTDIvol and DLP) and the patient weight (for body examinations) were the most important. Results: Analysis of the data submitted indicates that it is appropriate to propose national DRLs for CT head examinations in the 0- < 1, 1- < 5, 5- < 10 and 10- < 15 year age ranges. This extends the number of age categories of national DRLs from those at present and revises the existing values downwards. For CT chest examinations, it is appropriate to propose national DRLs for the first time in the UK for the 5- < 15, 15- < 30, 30- < 50 and 50- < 80 kg weight ranges. There were insufficient data received to propose national DRLs for abdomen/pelvis or cervical spine examinations. Recommendations towards optimisation focus on the use of tube current (mA) modulation, iterative reconstruction and the selection of examination tube voltage (kVp). Conclusions: Updated UK national DRLs are proposed for paediatric CT examinations of the head and chest. Advances in knowledge: A national patient dose audit of paediatric CT examinations has led to the proposal of updated national DRLs.


2000 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. R. M. Hay ◽  
T. P. Baglin ◽  
P. W. Collins ◽  
F. G. H. Hill ◽  
D. M. Keeling

2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 476-477
Author(s):  
Freddie C. Hamdy ◽  
Joanne Howson ◽  
Athene Lane ◽  
Jenny L. Donovan ◽  
David E. Neal

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document