{"title":"回顾RACR乳房x线摄影QA项目完成的前50例病例:幻象图像质量、处理器控制和剂量考虑。","authors":"D McLean, M Eckert, R Heard, W Chan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Mammography Quality Assurance Programme, recently established by the Royal Australasian College of Radiologists, has processed the first 50 applications. This programme, which closely follows the programme of the American College of Radiology (ACR), utilizes phantom film images, thermoluminescent dosimetry measurement of mean glandular dose, processor control charts, clinical images, equipment reports and required survey information to establish that a centre conforms to a minimum standard in mammography. The present paper describes the initial results of the first phantom images, dose measurements, processor control and survey information. A film review panel of six members has been trained in phantom film reading. Their evaluation of phantom films was compared with film readings by members of the ACR and was found to be in close agreement. Fifty films have been evaluated up to the present time with a failure rate of 26%. The major causes of failure were unacceptable film artefacts and poor contrast (as indicated by reduced fibre and mass visibility). A surprising result was the high failure in processing, where 23% of units reviewed had significant problems, including failure to keep the processor within required control limits. Only one centre recorded a mean glandular dose above 2 mGy with no centre over the 3 mGy limit. A review of the frequency of the quality control testing shows that the acceptance of quality assurance in mammography, while greater than in the initial stages of the ACR programme, is less than current US practice. These initial results for the accreditation process probably reflect an initial period of adjustment, as seen by the high pass rate achieved by centres that have resubmitted material to gain accreditation.</p>","PeriodicalId":75572,"journal":{"name":"Australasian radiology","volume":"41 4","pages":"387-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of the first 50 cases completed by the RACR mammography QA programme: phantom image quality, processor control and dose considerations.\",\"authors\":\"D McLean, M Eckert, R Heard, W Chan\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Mammography Quality Assurance Programme, recently established by the Royal Australasian College of Radiologists, has processed the first 50 applications. This programme, which closely follows the programme of the American College of Radiology (ACR), utilizes phantom film images, thermoluminescent dosimetry measurement of mean glandular dose, processor control charts, clinical images, equipment reports and required survey information to establish that a centre conforms to a minimum standard in mammography. The present paper describes the initial results of the first phantom images, dose measurements, processor control and survey information. A film review panel of six members has been trained in phantom film reading. Their evaluation of phantom films was compared with film readings by members of the ACR and was found to be in close agreement. Fifty films have been evaluated up to the present time with a failure rate of 26%. The major causes of failure were unacceptable film artefacts and poor contrast (as indicated by reduced fibre and mass visibility). A surprising result was the high failure in processing, where 23% of units reviewed had significant problems, including failure to keep the processor within required control limits. Only one centre recorded a mean glandular dose above 2 mGy with no centre over the 3 mGy limit. A review of the frequency of the quality control testing shows that the acceptance of quality assurance in mammography, while greater than in the initial stages of the ACR programme, is less than current US practice. These initial results for the accreditation process probably reflect an initial period of adjustment, as seen by the high pass rate achieved by centres that have resubmitted material to gain accreditation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian radiology\",\"volume\":\"41 4\",\"pages\":\"387-91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Review of the first 50 cases completed by the RACR mammography QA programme: phantom image quality, processor control and dose considerations.
The Mammography Quality Assurance Programme, recently established by the Royal Australasian College of Radiologists, has processed the first 50 applications. This programme, which closely follows the programme of the American College of Radiology (ACR), utilizes phantom film images, thermoluminescent dosimetry measurement of mean glandular dose, processor control charts, clinical images, equipment reports and required survey information to establish that a centre conforms to a minimum standard in mammography. The present paper describes the initial results of the first phantom images, dose measurements, processor control and survey information. A film review panel of six members has been trained in phantom film reading. Their evaluation of phantom films was compared with film readings by members of the ACR and was found to be in close agreement. Fifty films have been evaluated up to the present time with a failure rate of 26%. The major causes of failure were unacceptable film artefacts and poor contrast (as indicated by reduced fibre and mass visibility). A surprising result was the high failure in processing, where 23% of units reviewed had significant problems, including failure to keep the processor within required control limits. Only one centre recorded a mean glandular dose above 2 mGy with no centre over the 3 mGy limit. A review of the frequency of the quality control testing shows that the acceptance of quality assurance in mammography, while greater than in the initial stages of the ACR programme, is less than current US practice. These initial results for the accreditation process probably reflect an initial period of adjustment, as seen by the high pass rate achieved by centres that have resubmitted material to gain accreditation.