Journal of Medical Physics
 Home | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscription | Login  The official journal of AMPI, IOMP and AFOMP      
 Users online: 490  Home  EMail this page Print this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size 
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 43  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 85-92

Radiation dose measurements in a 256-slice computed tomography scanner

1 Baylor Scott and White Healthcare System, Medical Physics and Radiation Safety, Dallas, Texas 75246, USA
2 Division of Medical Physics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40536-0293, USA

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Victor J Weir
Baylor Scott and White Healthcare System, Medical Physics and Radiation Safety, Baylor Health Care System, 4005 Crutcher Street, Suite 330, Dallas, Texas 75246
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_129_17

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare computed tomography (CT) radiation dose measurement methods proposed by TG111, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and a direct dose profile integral (DPI) measurement method. Methods: Pencil and Farmer ion chambers are used for integrating dose profiles at different beam widths in a 60 cm long body phantom. Resulting DPI is used to calculate CT dose index (CTDI) at each beam width. Measurements are also done for a pencil chamber inserted into a 15 cm body phantom at the reference beam width. The reference measurement is scaled with pencil chamber measurements in air at different beam widths, according to the IEC approach. Finally, point dose measurements are done with a Farmer chamber under equilibrium conditions according to the TG111 method. All CTDIs calculated from measured data are compared to the scanner displayed CTDIs. Results: Calculated CTDIs, at different beam widths, using the IEC approach are within 20% of CTDIs calculated from DPI measurements in a 60 cm long body phantom. Dose Length Integral (DLI) obtained from TG111 method is close to the results obtained from DPI measurements. Scanner displayed CTDIs are lower than all measured values by up to 38% at the techniques used. Conclusion: Although the IEC method is the easiest to use compared to the TG111 and direct DPI measurement method, it underestimates dose indices by about 20%. CTDIs displayed on the GE scanner are lower than those measured in this study by up to 38%.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded137    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal