Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMothiram, Ursula
dc.date.accessioned2015-02-17
dc.date.available2015-02-17
dc.date.issued2014-07-24
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2123/12744
dc.descriptionIncludes publicationsen_AU
dc.description.abstractIntroduction With digital radiography (DR), radiographers receive immediate feedback on detector exposure in the form of the exposure index (EI). Purpose To identify whether radiographers were meeting the manufacturer-recommended EI (MREI) value ranges for routine chest, abdomen and pelvis X-ray examinations under a variety of conditions and to examine factors that impacted upon EI levels. Methods Data on 5000 adult X-ray examinations were collected, including: EI values, examination parameters, patients’ gender, dates of birth, dates and times of examinations, grid usages and the presence of metallic implants or prostheses. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise data sets and Mann–Whitney U testing was performed to establish causal agents for EI value variations. Results EI values were often outside the MREI ranges. EI value variations were identified, with significantly higher EI values recorded for female compared with male patients for all manufacturers (P ≤ 0.04), indicating higher detector exposures except for Philips direct digital radiography (DDR), where increased EI values indicated lower exposures (P=0.01). Higher EI values were also noted for the following variables: out of hours radiography (P ≤ 0.02), the absence of secondary radiation grids with Philips DDR chest X-rays (P = 0.03), younger patients with Siemens DDR chest X-rays (P < 0.0001) and higher kVp for Carestream computed radiography (CR) chest X-rays (P = 0.02). Significantly lower median EI values were demonstrated for Carestream CR chest X-rays when a metallic implant or prosthesis was present (P = 0.02). Discussion Non adherence to MREIs has been demonstrated. EI value discrepancies have been identified as being dependent on patient gender, time/day of exposure, grid usage, the presence of a metallic implants or prostheses, patient age and use of ≥ 100 kVp. The value of careful retrospective evaluation of EI databases has been highlighted.en_AU
dc.rightsThe author retains copyright of this thesis. It may only be used for the purposes of research and study. It must not be used for any other purposes and may not be transmitted or shared with others without prior permission.en_AU
dc.titleFactors affecting digital radiography exposure indices: are radiographers achieving the recommended levels?en_AU
dc.typeThesisen_AU
dc.date.valid2015-01-01en_AU
dc.type.thesisDoctor of Philosophyen_AU
usyd.facultyFaculty of Health Sciencesen_AU
usyd.departmentDiscipline of Medical Radiation Sciencesen_AU
usyd.degreeDoctor of Philosophy Ph.D.en_AU
usyd.awardinginstThe University of Sydneyen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.