Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93

The performances of three clinical computed radiography (CR) systems, (Agfa CR 75 (with CRMD 4.0 image plates), Kodak CR 850 (with Kodak GP plates) and Kodak CR 850A (with Kodak GP plates)) were evaluated using six tests recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93. The re...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wilbroad Muhogora, Renato Padovani, Faustino Bonutti, Peter Msaki, R Kazema
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2011-01-01
Series:Journal of Medical Physics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2011;volume=36;issue=3;spage=138;epage=146;aulast=Muhogora
id doaj-7101bd8d68ca4de994f7b1592a838cc4
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7101bd8d68ca4de994f7b1592a838cc42020-11-25T01:25:41ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Medical Physics0971-62031998-39132011-01-0136313814610.4103/0971-6203.83478Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93Wilbroad MuhogoraRenato PadovaniFaustino BonuttiPeter MsakiR KazemaThe performances of three clinical computed radiography (CR) systems, (Agfa CR 75 (with CRMD 4.0 image plates), Kodak CR 850 (with Kodak GP plates) and Kodak CR 850A (with Kodak GP plates)) were evaluated using six tests recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93. The results indicated variable performances with majority being within acceptable limits. The variations were mainly attributed to differences in detector formulations, plate readers′ characteristics, and aging effects. The differences of the mean low contrast scores between the imaging systems for three observers were statistically significant for Agfa and Kodak CR 850A (P=0.009) and for Kodak CR systems (P=0.006) probably because of the differences in ages. However, the differences were not statistically significant between Agfa and Kodak CR 850 (P=0.284) suggesting similar perceived image quality. The study demonstrates the need to implement quality control program regularly.http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2011;volume=36;issue=3;spage=138;epage=146;aulast=MuhogoraAAPM Report 93computed radiography systemsperformance evaluation
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Wilbroad Muhogora
Renato Padovani
Faustino Bonutti
Peter Msaki
R Kazema
spellingShingle Wilbroad Muhogora
Renato Padovani
Faustino Bonutti
Peter Msaki
R Kazema
Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93
Journal of Medical Physics
AAPM Report 93
computed radiography systems
performance evaluation
author_facet Wilbroad Muhogora
Renato Padovani
Faustino Bonutti
Peter Msaki
R Kazema
author_sort Wilbroad Muhogora
title Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93
title_short Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93
title_full Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93
title_fullStr Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93
title_full_unstemmed Performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93
title_sort performance evaluation of three computed radiography systems using methods recommended in american association of physicists in medicine report 93
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
series Journal of Medical Physics
issn 0971-6203
1998-3913
publishDate 2011-01-01
description The performances of three clinical computed radiography (CR) systems, (Agfa CR 75 (with CRMD 4.0 image plates), Kodak CR 850 (with Kodak GP plates) and Kodak CR 850A (with Kodak GP plates)) were evaluated using six tests recommended in American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 93. The results indicated variable performances with majority being within acceptable limits. The variations were mainly attributed to differences in detector formulations, plate readers′ characteristics, and aging effects. The differences of the mean low contrast scores between the imaging systems for three observers were statistically significant for Agfa and Kodak CR 850A (P=0.009) and for Kodak CR systems (P=0.006) probably because of the differences in ages. However, the differences were not statistically significant between Agfa and Kodak CR 850 (P=0.284) suggesting similar perceived image quality. The study demonstrates the need to implement quality control program regularly.
topic AAPM Report 93
computed radiography systems
performance evaluation
url http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2011;volume=36;issue=3;spage=138;epage=146;aulast=Muhogora
work_keys_str_mv AT wilbroadmuhogora performanceevaluationofthreecomputedradiographysystemsusingmethodsrecommendedinamericanassociationofphysicistsinmedicinereport93
AT renatopadovani performanceevaluationofthreecomputedradiographysystemsusingmethodsrecommendedinamericanassociationofphysicistsinmedicinereport93
AT faustinobonutti performanceevaluationofthreecomputedradiographysystemsusingmethodsrecommendedinamericanassociationofphysicistsinmedicinereport93
AT petermsaki performanceevaluationofthreecomputedradiographysystemsusingmethodsrecommendedinamericanassociationofphysicistsinmedicinereport93
AT rkazema performanceevaluationofthreecomputedradiographysystemsusingmethodsrecommendedinamericanassociationofphysicistsinmedicinereport93
_version_ 1725112487331758080