z-logo
Premium
Accuracy of a dose‐area product compared to an absorbed dose to water at a point in a 2 cm diameter field
Author(s) -
Dufreneix S.,
Ostrowsky A.,
Rapp B.,
Daures J.,
Bordy J. M.
Publication year - 2016
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 - 10.1118/1.4953207
Subject(s) - absorbed dose , dosimeter , dosimetry , dose profile , percentage depth dose curve , calibration , ionization chamber , materials science , nuclear medicine , optics , physics , mathematics , statistics , medicine , ion , quantum mechanics , ionization
Purpose: Graphite calorimeters with a core diameter larger than the beam can be used to establish dosimetric references in small fields. The dose‐area product (DAP) measured can theoretically be linked to an absorbed dose at a point by the determination of a profile correction. This study aims at comparing the DAP‐based protocol to the usual absorbed dose at a point protocol in a 2 cm diameter field for which both references exist. Methods: Two calorimeters were used, respectively, with a sensitive volume of 0.6 cm (for the absorbed dose at a point measurement) and 3 cm diameter (for the DAP measurement). Profile correction was calculated from a 2D dose mapping using three detectors: a PinPoint chamber, a synthetic diamond, and EBT3 films. A specific protocol to read EBT3 films was implemented and the dose‐rate and energy dependences were studied to assure a precise measurement, especially in the penumbra and out‐of‐field regions. Results: EBT3 films were found independent on dose rates over the range studied but showed a strong under‐response (18%) at low energies. Depending on the dosimeter used for calculating the profile correction, a deviation of 0.8% (PinPoint chamber), 0.9% (diamond), or 1.9% (EBT3 films) was observed between the calibration coefficient derived from DAP measurements and the one directly established in terms of absorbed dose to water at a point. Conclusions: The DAP method can currently be linked to the classical dosimetric reference system based in an absorbed dose at a point only with a confidence interval of 95% ( k = 2). None of the detectors studied can be used to determine an absorbed dose to water at a point from a DAP measurement with an uncertainty smaller than 1.2%.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom