OPPapers.com

Abstract Cr/Dr X-Rays

Ramli, K., Abdullah, B. J. J., Ng, K.-H., Mahmud, R., Hussain, A. F. (December 2005). Computed and conventional chest radiography: A comparison of image quality and radiation dose. Australasian Radiology; Vol. 49, Issue 6, p460-466. Retrieved on September 23, 2008 from Academic Search Complete.

Abstract:

The purpose of this experiment was to compare the quality x-rays for film and computed chest radiography. In layman’s terms they are comparing the old film x-rays, to the new CR (Computed Radiography) and DR (Digital Radiography) x-rays. They took chest x-rays of 60 patients using each image receptor type. For each patient, the following parameters were recorded: sex, age, weight, height, body mass index (BMI), body thickness, focus-to-detector distance, kVp and mAs. While doing the exams, they also measured the Entrance Skin Dose (ESD), using thermo luminescent dosimeters (TLD). After collecting the data measured by the TLDs, it was determined that the difference in the three different image receptors was >0.05. Image quality was, as subjectively as possible, evaluated following the guidelines established by the Commission of the European Communities (CEC). There was no significant difference noted between the computed and conventional images.

Opinion:

In my opinion this was an interesting study because they compared each type of image receptor in use today. What this study proves is that technology is making our jobs as technologist easier and faster, while still keeping quality the same. I personally think that DR is the best way to go, because it gives you the image within seconds, instead of having to take the time to process the cassette (CR), or develop the film (conventional). This could really be a major advantage when it comes to a trauma victim, or any other time sensitive case. However, digital radiography also poses risks, such as unnoticed increases in patient dose. The automatic optimization of image contrast and density in DR systems...