Abstract
Use of medical imaging continues to increase, making the largest contribution to the exposure of populations from artificial sources of radiation worldwide. The principle of optimisation of protection is that ‘the likelihood of incurring exposures, the number of people exposed, and the magnitude of their individual doses should all be kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), taking into account economic and societal factors’. Optimisation for medical imaging involves more than ALARA – it requires keeping individual patient exposures to the minimum necessary to achieve the required medical objectives. In other words, the type, number, and quality of images must be adequate to obtain the information needed for diagnosis or intervention. Dose reductions for imaging or x-ray-image-guided procedures should not be used if they degrade image quality to the point where the images are inadequate for the clinical purpose. The move to digital imaging has provided versatile acquisition, post-processing, and presentation options, and enabled wide and often immediate availability of image information. However, because images are adjusted for optimal viewing, the appearance may not give any indication if the dose is higher than necessary. Nevertheless, digital images provide opportunities for further optimisation, and allow the application of artificial intelligence methods. Optimisation of radiological protection for digital radiology (radiography, fluoroscopy, and computed tomography) involves selection and installation of equipment, design and construction of facilities, choice of optimal equipment settings, day-to-day methods of operation, quality control programmes, and ensuring that all personnel receive proper initial and career-long training. The radiation dose levels that patients receive also have implications for doses to staff. As new imaging equipment incorporates more options to improve performance, it becomes more complex and less easily understood, so operators have to be given more extensive training. Ongoing monitoring, review, and analysis of performance is required that feeds back into the improvement and development of imaging protocols. Several different aspects relating to optimisation of protection that need to be developed are set out in this publication. The first is collaboration between radiologists/other radiological medical practitioners, radiographers/medical radiation technologists, and medical physicists, each of whom have key skills that can only contribute to the process effectively when individuals work together as a core team. The second is appropriate methodology and technology, with the knowledge and expertise required to use each effectively. The third relates to organisational processes which ensure that required tasks, such as equipment performance tests, patient dose surveys, and review of protocols, are carried out. There is wide variation in equipment, funding, and expertise around the world, and the majority of facilities do not have all the tools, professional teams, and expertise to fully embrace all the possibilities for optimisation. Therefore, this publication sets out broad levels for aspects of optimisation that different facilities might achieve, and through which they can progress incrementally: Level D – preliminary; Level C – basic; Level B – intermediate; and Level A – advanced. Guidance from professional societies can be invaluable in helping users to evaluate systems and aid in adoption of best practice. Examples of systems and activities that should be in place to achieve the different levels are set out. Imaging facilities can then evaluate the arrangements they already have, and use this publication to guide decisions about the next actions to be taken in optimising their imaging services.
Reference166 articles.
1. AAMC, 2014. The Core Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for Entering Residencies. American Association of Medical Colleges, Washington, DC. Available at: https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/medical-education/cbme/core-epas (last accessed 28 August 2021).
2. AAPM, 2001. Cardiac Catheterisation Equipment Performance. AAPM Report No. 70. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Alexandria, VA.
3. Ongoing quality control in digital radiography: Report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 151
4. AAPM, 2018. Considerations for the Use of Handheld Image Viewers. AAPM Report No. 260. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Alexandria, VA.
5. AAPM, 2019a. Estimating Patient Organ Dose with Computed Tomography: a Review of Present Methodology and Required DICOM Information. AAPM Report No. 246. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Alexandria, VA.