As a laboratory certified to ISO 9001:2008 and accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, the Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory (SSDL)-Nuclear Malaysia has incorporated an overall comprehensive system for technical and quality management in promoting a reliable individual monitoring service (IMS). Faster identification and resolution of issues regarding dosemeter preparation and issuing of reports, personnel enhancement, improved customer satisfaction and overall efficiency of laboratory activities are all results of the implementation of an effective quality system. Review of these measures and responses to observed trends provide continuous improvement of the system. By having these mechanisms, reliability of the IMS can be assured in the promotion of safe behaviour at all levels of the workforce utilising ionising radiation facilities. Upgradation of in the reporting program through a web-based e-SSDL marks a major improvement in Nuclear Malaysia's IMS reliability on the whole. The system is a vital step in providing a user friendly and effective occupational exposure evaluation program in the country. It provides a higher level of confidence in the results generated for occupational dose monitoring of the IMS, thus, enhances the status of the radiation protection framework of the country.
The systematic monitoring of image quality and radiation dose is an ultimate solution to ensuring the continuously high quality of mammography examination. At present several protocols exist around the world, and different test objects are used for quality control (QC) of the physical and technical aspects of screen-film mammography. This situation may lead to differences in radiation image quality and dose reported. This article reviews the global QC perspective for the physical and technical aspects of screen-film mammography with regard to image quality and radiation dose. It points out issues that must be resolved in terms of radiation dose and that also affect the comparison.
Protocols developed for high-energy dosimetry IAEA (Technical Reports Series No. 277, 1997), AAPM (Med. Phys. 10 (1983) 741: Med. Phys. 18 (1991) 73: Med. Phys. 21 (1994) 1251), IPEMB (Phys. Med. Biol. 41 (1996) 2557), and HPA (Phys. Med. Biol. 28 (1983) 1097) have continued to enhance precision in dose measurements and the optimization of radiotherapy procedures. While recent dosimetry protocols, including those due to the IAEA and IPEMB, have made a number of improvements compared with previous protocols, it is further desirable to develop absolute dosimetry methods of dose measurements. Measurements based on careful implementation of procedures contained within the various protocols have been carried out in an effort to determine the extent to which discrepancies exist among the protocols. Dose in water at dmax was measured using cylindrical and parallel-plate ionization chambers for 6 MV photon beams and 5 and 12 MeV electron beams. Results obtained from the use of the AAPM and HPA protocols for 6 MV photon beams were found to be 0.9% larger and 0.1% smaller, respectively, than those measured following the IAEA protocol. Calibration dose measurements for 5 and 12 MeV electron beams in water phantoms were found to agree to within 1%, this being well within recommendations from the ICRU and other sources regarding the accuracy of dose delivery.
Radiochromic and radiographic films are widely used for radiation dosimetry due to the advantage of high spatial resolution and two-dimensional dose measurement. Different types of scanners, including various models of flatbed scanners, have been used as part of the dosimetry readout procedure. This paper focuses on the characterization of the EBT2 film response in combination with a Microtek ScanMaker 9800XL scanner and the subsequent use in the dosimetric verification of a 3D conformal radiotherapy treatment. The film reproducibility and scanner uniformity of the Microtek ScanMaker 9800XL was studied. A three-field 3D conformal radiotherapy treatment was planned on an anthropomorphic phantom and EBT2 film measurements were carried out to verify the treatment. The interfilm reproducibility was found to be 0.25%. Over a period of three months, the films darkened by 1%. The scanner reproducibility was ± 2% and a nonuniformity was ±1.9% along the direction perpendicular to the scan direction. EBT2 measurements showed an underdose of 6.2% at high-dose region compared to TPS predicted dose. This may be due to the inability of the treatment planning system to predict the correct dose distribution in the presence of tissue inhomogeneities and the uncertainty of the scanner reproducibility and uniformity. The use of EBT2 film in conjunction with the axial CT image of the anthropomorphic phantom allows the evaluation of the anatomical location of dose discrepancies between the EBT2 measured dose distribution and TPS predicted dose distribution.
After years of establishment of computed radiography (CR) and digital radiography (DR), manufacturers have introduced exposure indicator/index (EI) as a feedback mechanism for patient dose. However, EI consistency is uncertain for CR. Most manufacturers recommended EI values in a range of numbers for all examination, instead of giving the exact range for a specific body part, raising a concern of inappropriate exposure given to the patient in clinical practice. The aims of this study were to investigate the EI consistency in DR systems produced in constant exposure parameters and clinical condition, and to determine the interaction between the anatomical part and EI. A phantom study of skull, chest, abdomen and hand was carried out and four systems were used for comparison-Fuji CR, Carestream CR, Siemens DR and Carestream DR. For each projection, the phantom positioning and exposure parameters were set according to the standard clinical practice. All exposure parameters and clinical conditions were kept constant. Twenty (20) exposures were taken for each projection and the EI was recorded. Findings showed that EI is not consistent in DR systems despite constant exposure parameters and clinical condition except in Siemens DR, through skull examination. Statistical analysis showed a significant interaction between anatomical parts and EI values (P < 0.05). EI alone was proven to be less reliable to provide technologist a correct feedback on exposure level. The interaction between anatomical parts and EI values intensifies the need for an anatomical-specific EI values set by all manufacturers for accurate feedback on the exposure parameters used and the detector entrance dose.