» Articles » PMID: 21491196

Pediatric Digital Radiography Summit Overview: State of Confusion

Overview
Journal Pediatr Radiol
Specialty Pediatrics
Date 2011 Apr 15
PMID 21491196
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

On Feb. 4, 2010, the Alliance for Radiation Safety in Pediatric Radiology held a Pediatric Digital Radiography Summit. The goal was for radiologists, radiologic technologists, medical physicists, and vendor representatives, including engineers, medical physicists and education specialists, to discuss the challenges to achieving the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle in pediatric digital radiography and to lay the groundwork for overcoming these obstacles. This article focuses on the state of confusion that exists for radiologists and radiologic technologists who use digital radiography equipment. Radiologists might have a difficult time accepting lower dose (noisy images), and radiologic technologists might respond by increasing patient exposures, which results in excessive patient doses. For reporting exposures, vendors have a history of using proprietary terms that confuse users. In addition, technical parameters cannot be easily exported for quality assurance, and there is no national standard for digital radiography. Presentations in this minisymposium focus on suggestions for the cooperative development of new technical standards, education and training to improve the quality of digital radiography in pediatric patients and promote radiation protection for children.

Citing Articles

Radiation use in diagnostic imaging in children: approaching the value of the pediatric radiology community.

Frush D, Sorantin E Pediatr Radiol. 2021; 51(4):532-543.

PMID: 33743037 DOI: 10.1007/s00247-020-04924-6.


Evaluation of radiographers' knowledge and attitudes of image quality optimisation in paediatric digital radiography in Saudi Arabia and Australia: a survey-based study.

Alsleem H, Davidson R, Al-Dhafiri B, Alsleem R, Ameer H J Med Radiat Sci. 2019; 66(4):229-237.

PMID: 31697039 PMC: 6920681. DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.366.


Visual grading analysis of digital neonatal chest phantom X-ray images: Impact of detector type, dose and image processing on image quality.

Smet M, Breysem L, Mussen E, Bosmans H, Marshall N, Cockmartin L Eur Radiol. 2018; 28(7):2951-2959.

PMID: 29460076 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5301-2.


Electronic collimation and radiation protection in paediatric digital radiography: revival of the silver lining.

Bomer J, Wiersma-Deijl L, Holscher H Insights Imaging. 2013; 4(5):723-7.

PMID: 23982805 PMC: 3781259. DOI: 10.1007/s13244-013-0281-5.


Creating accountability in image quality analysis. Part 2: medical imaging accreditation.

Reiner B J Digit Imaging. 2013; 26(3):371-4.

PMID: 23595872 PMC: 3649039. DOI: 10.1007/s10278-013-9605-8.

References
1.
Destouet J, Bassett L, Yaffe M, Butler P, Wilcox P . The ACR's Mammography Accreditation Program: ten years of experience since MQSA. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007; 2(7):585-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2004.12.005. View

2.
Veldkamp W, Kroft L, van Delft J, Geleijns J . A technique for simulating the effect of dose reduction on image quality in digital chest radiography. J Digit Imaging. 2008; 22(2):114-25. PMC: 3043684. DOI: 10.1007/s10278-008-9104-5. View

3.
Suleiman O, Spelic D, McCrohan J, Symonds G, Houn F . Mammography in the 1990s: the United States and Canada. Radiology. 1999; 210(2):345-51. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.210.2.r99fe45345. View

4.
Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, BERDON W . Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 176(2):289-96. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.176.2.1760289. View

5.
Roehrig H, Krupinski E, Hulett R . Reduction of patient exposure in pediatric radiology. Acad Radiol. 1997; 4(8):547-57. DOI: 10.1016/s1076-6332(97)80203-6. View