Premium
SU‐FF‐I‐55: Quality Control in Mammography Screening
Author(s) -
Igna L,
Burkhardt R.,
Cosma C.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.1997535
Subject(s) - mammography , medical physics , context (archaeology) , automatic exposure control , quality assurance , radiological weapon , medicine , digital mammography , imaging phantom , medical physicist , limiting , breast cancer , nuclear medicine , radiology , cancer , engineering , external quality assessment , mechanical engineering , paleontology , pathology , biology
Purpose: The Romanian legislation in nuclear field regarding radiological protection of persons in the case of radiation medical exposures introduces the obligatorily implementation of QA programs in radiological practice. In this context, AIHA had a significant role receiving a grant from the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation to implement Mammography Training Program in Romania. In this paper, the first results of the application in Romania of European protocols for QC of mammography screening in two representative mammography facilities in Cluj‐Napoca (Institute of Oncology and Clinic District Hospital) are presented. Method and Materials: Between the several components of mammography system the QC was focused on the crucial elements such as the film processing and the basic performance of X‐ray equipment (screen‐film contact, phantom images, automatic exposure control system performance and AEC reproducibility, X‐ray beam quality, average glandular dose and radiation output rate). The applied methodology is in accordance with ACR Mammography Quality Control Manual (1999). Results: Characteristic parameters of mammographic and automatic processing units was compared with limiting values given by International Protocols or with the permissible ranges calculated in advance. If the test results fell outside the action limits, the source of the problem had been identified and corrective actions had been taken. The worst deficiencies found in the equipment were related to AEC system and density control setting. Conclusion: The result of this survey shows that QC procedures have a positive effect on the performance of mammography X‐ray equipment and on the production of high quality images. This minimises the possibility of repeating exposures and hence the patient dose. Practical application of such QC program in Romania impose the raise of medical physicist role in clinical activities and the assurance of qualitative service for X‐ray equipment.