A Review of MRI Acoustic Noise Outputs and Hearing Protection Device Performance.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pub Date : 2024-12-17 DOI:10.1002/jmri.29665
Michael Steckner
{"title":"A Review of MRI Acoustic Noise Outputs and Hearing Protection Device Performance.","authors":"Michael Steckner","doi":"10.1002/jmri.29665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The acoustic noise outputs of MR equipment typically require a hearing protection device (HPD) to minimize the likelihood of patient hearing loss. Several different ways to quantify HPD performance have been developed and adopted over many years in different countries across the world (eg, NRR, SNR, SLC80). These HPD evaluations are done in controlled laboratory conditions, following different standardized methodologies, producing different performance ratings for the same HPD, and consequently of a variable relationship with achieved real-world usage performance assessments. Conversely, the MR manufacturers follow one standard (NEMA MS-4) which strives to produce a worst-case peak and average acoustic noise output measurement. Measuring the acoustic output of MR equipment is a complex undertaking in the confined patient space, especially when considering the variability of what is in the patient imaging space. Given both the MR equipment acoustic output measurements and the HPD performance rating, it is theoretically possible to estimate the worst-case patient exposure level, subject to the uncertainty of how successfully the protection was applied and population variability. An assessment, shown here, suggests that the worst-case outputs from the loudest MR equipment requires the best passive HPD performance presently available in order to meet patient protection guidelines, but only when the HPD is properly deployed. However, when considering government agency derating recommendations that estimate protection achieved during practical application, the various metrics are not consistent in confirming that the best HPD provide sufficient protection. This paper reviews the challenges of determining and providing sufficient hearing protection. The correct deployment of HPD, and its verification, is thus a critical factor in ensuring adequate patient protection and the main concern of this review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.</p>","PeriodicalId":16140,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.29665","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The acoustic noise outputs of MR equipment typically require a hearing protection device (HPD) to minimize the likelihood of patient hearing loss. Several different ways to quantify HPD performance have been developed and adopted over many years in different countries across the world (eg, NRR, SNR, SLC80). These HPD evaluations are done in controlled laboratory conditions, following different standardized methodologies, producing different performance ratings for the same HPD, and consequently of a variable relationship with achieved real-world usage performance assessments. Conversely, the MR manufacturers follow one standard (NEMA MS-4) which strives to produce a worst-case peak and average acoustic noise output measurement. Measuring the acoustic output of MR equipment is a complex undertaking in the confined patient space, especially when considering the variability of what is in the patient imaging space. Given both the MR equipment acoustic output measurements and the HPD performance rating, it is theoretically possible to estimate the worst-case patient exposure level, subject to the uncertainty of how successfully the protection was applied and population variability. An assessment, shown here, suggests that the worst-case outputs from the loudest MR equipment requires the best passive HPD performance presently available in order to meet patient protection guidelines, but only when the HPD is properly deployed. However, when considering government agency derating recommendations that estimate protection achieved during practical application, the various metrics are not consistent in confirming that the best HPD provide sufficient protection. This paper reviews the challenges of determining and providing sufficient hearing protection. The correct deployment of HPD, and its verification, is thus a critical factor in ensuring adequate patient protection and the main concern of this review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
MRI声学噪声输出和听力保护装置性能综述。
磁共振设备的噪声输出通常需要一个听力保护装置(HPD),以尽量减少患者听力损失的可能性。多年来,世界上不同的国家已经开发并采用了几种不同的方法来量化HPD性能(例如,NRR, SNR, SLC80)。这些HPD评估是在受控的实验室条件下进行的,遵循不同的标准化方法,对相同的HPD产生不同的性能评级,因此与实际使用性能评估的关系是可变的。相反,MR制造商遵循一个标准(NEMA MS-4),该标准力求产生最坏情况峰值和平均噪声输出测量。在狭窄的患者空间中测量MR设备的声输出是一项复杂的工作,特别是考虑到患者成像空间中的可变性。考虑到磁共振设备的声输出测量和HPD性能评级,理论上可以估计出最坏情况下患者的暴露水平,但要考虑到防护效果的不确定性和人群的可变性。如图所示的一项评估表明,为了满足患者保护指南,最大MR设备的最坏情况输出需要目前可用的最佳被动HPD性能,但前提是HPD配置得当。然而,当考虑到政府机构在实际应用中估计保护效果的降额建议时,各种指标在确认最佳HPD提供足够保护方面并不一致。本文综述了确定和提供充分听力保护的挑战。因此,HPD的正确部署及其验证是确保充分保护患者的关键因素,也是本综述的主要关注点。证据等级:5,技术有效性:第5阶段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
6.80%
发文量
494
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (JMRI) is an international journal devoted to the timely publication of basic and clinical research, educational and review articles, and other information related to the diagnostic applications of magnetic resonance.
期刊最新文献
Associations of Postencephalitic Epilepsy Using Multi-Contrast Whole Brain MRI: A Large Self-Supervised Vision Foundation Model Strategy. Influence of Multiband Technique on Temporal Diffusion Spectroscopy and Its Diagnostic Value in Breast Tumors. Application of Anti-Motion Ultra-Fast Quantitative MRI in Neurological Disorder Imaging: Insights From Huntington's Disease. Editorial for "Identifying Primary Sites of Spinal Metastases: Expert-Derived Features vs. ResNet50 Model Using Non-Enhanced MRI". Effects of Static and Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields on Gene Expression.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1