title: The importance of radiation quality for optimisation in radiology.
abstract: Selection of the appropriate radiation quality is an important aspect of optimisation for every clinical imaging task in radiology, since it affects both image quality and patient dose. Spreadsheet calculations of attenuation and absorption have been applied to basic imaging tasks to provide an assessment of imaging performance for a selection of phosphors used in radiology systems. Contrast, which is an important component of image quality affected by radiation quality, has been assessed in terms of the contrast to noise ratio (CNR) for a variety of X-ray beams. Both CNR and patient dose fall with tube potential, and selection of the best option is a compromise that will provide an adequate level of image quality with as low a radiation dose as practicable. It is important that systems are set up to match the response of the imaging phosphor, as there are significant differences between phosphors. For example, the sensitivity of barium fluorohalides used in computed radiography declines at higher tube potentials, whereas that of gadolinium oxysulphide used in rare earth screens increases. Addition of 0.2 mm copper filters, which can reduce patient entrance surface dose by 50%, may be advantageous for many applications in radiography and fluoroscopy. The disadvantage of adding copper is that tube output levels have to be increased. Application of simple calculations of the type employed here could prove useful for investigating and assessing the implications of potential changes in X-ray beam quality prior to implementation of new techniques.
authors: Health Physics, Gartnavel Royal Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland.
authors: Cj
authors: C
authors: Martin
references: Phys Med Biol. 2006 Nov 7;51(21):5475-85
references: 17047264
references: Appl Radiat Isot. 1999 Jan;50(1):1-19
references: 10028625
references: Radiology. 1999 Dec;213(3):727-34
references: 10580946
references: Ann ICRP. 1991;21(1-3):1-201
references: 2053748
references: Phys Med Biol. 2006 Jun 7;51(11):2953-70
references: 16723777
references: Appl Radiat Isot. 1999 Jan;50(1):21-38
references: 10028626