澳大利亚公立医院伽马相机和SPECT/CT质量控制项目抽样调查。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-17 DOI:10.1007/s13246-024-01436-7
Nirvadesh Ramkishore, James Crocker, Ruth Martin, Kenneth S Yap, Zoe Brady
{"title":"澳大利亚公立医院伽马相机和SPECT/CT质量控制项目抽样调查。","authors":"Nirvadesh Ramkishore, James Crocker, Ruth Martin, Kenneth S Yap, Zoe Brady","doi":"10.1007/s13246-024-01436-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Performance testing of gamma cameras and single photon computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) systems is not subject to regulatory requirements across states and territories in Australia. Internationally recognised testing standards from organisations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) describe methodologies for recommended tests. However, variations exist in suggested quality control (QC) schedules from professional bodies such as the Australia and New Zealand Society of Nuclear Medicine (ANZSNM). In this study, a survey was conducted to benchmark current QC programs across a selected sample of eight standalone and networked Australian public hospitals. Vendor-specific flood-field uniformity (intrinsic or extrinsic/system) verification without photomultiplier (PMT) tuning and CT QC were performed at all sites. Weekly and monthly PMT tuning followed by intrinsic flood-field verifications were performed at most sites. At least half of the sites performed monthly centre of rotation (COR) offset verifications. SPECT/CT alignment calibrations and verifications were undertaken by service engineers at all sites, and periodic verifications were performed by local staff at varying frequencies. Variations were observed for other periodic QC tests such as spatial resolution and planar sensitivity. Similarly, variations were observed for tests specific to whole-body systems and SPECT systems. Most sites checked daily and periodic QC results against pass/fail criteria set by vendors. Additional analyses of the QC results, including trend analysis and periodic reviews, were not common practice. The lack of regulatory requirements is likely to have led to variations in QC tests that are generally either harder to perform or are more labour intensive.</p>","PeriodicalId":48490,"journal":{"name":"Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A survey of gamma camera and SPECT/CT quality control programs across a sample of public hospitals in Australia.\",\"authors\":\"Nirvadesh Ramkishore, James Crocker, Ruth Martin, Kenneth S Yap, Zoe Brady\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13246-024-01436-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Performance testing of gamma cameras and single photon computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) systems is not subject to regulatory requirements across states and territories in Australia. Internationally recognised testing standards from organisations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) describe methodologies for recommended tests. However, variations exist in suggested quality control (QC) schedules from professional bodies such as the Australia and New Zealand Society of Nuclear Medicine (ANZSNM). In this study, a survey was conducted to benchmark current QC programs across a selected sample of eight standalone and networked Australian public hospitals. Vendor-specific flood-field uniformity (intrinsic or extrinsic/system) verification without photomultiplier (PMT) tuning and CT QC were performed at all sites. Weekly and monthly PMT tuning followed by intrinsic flood-field verifications were performed at most sites. At least half of the sites performed monthly centre of rotation (COR) offset verifications. SPECT/CT alignment calibrations and verifications were undertaken by service engineers at all sites, and periodic verifications were performed by local staff at varying frequencies. Variations were observed for other periodic QC tests such as spatial resolution and planar sensitivity. Similarly, variations were observed for tests specific to whole-body systems and SPECT systems. Most sites checked daily and periodic QC results against pass/fail criteria set by vendors. Additional analyses of the QC results, including trend analysis and periodic reviews, were not common practice. The lack of regulatory requirements is likely to have led to variations in QC tests that are generally either harder to perform or are more labour intensive.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-024-01436-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-024-01436-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在澳大利亚,伽马相机和单光子计算机断层扫描/计算机断层成像(SPECT/CT)系统的性能测试不受各州和地区法规要求的限制。美国国家电气制造商协会(NEMA)等组织制定的国际公认测试标准介绍了推荐的测试方法。然而,澳大利亚和新西兰核医学学会 (ANZSNM) 等专业机构建议的质量控制 (QC) 计划却存在差异。在这项研究中,我们对澳大利亚八家独立和联网的公立医院进行了抽样调查,以确定当前质量控制计划的基准。所有地点都进行了供应商特定的泛场均匀性(内在或外在/系统)验证,但没有进行光电倍增管(PMT)调谐和 CT 质量控制。大多数医疗点每周和每月进行一次光电倍增管调谐,然后进行固有洪场验证。至少有一半的站点每月进行旋转中心偏移验证。SPECT/CT 校准和验证由所有站点的服务工程师进行,定期验证由当地员工以不同频率进行。空间分辨率和平面灵敏度等其他定期质量控制测试也存在差异。同样,全身系统和 SPECT 系统的特定测试也存在差异。大多数研究机构根据供应商设定的通过/未通过标准检查每日和定期质控结果。对质控结果的其他分析,包括趋势分析和定期审查,并不是常见的做法。缺乏监管要求很可能会导致质控检测方法的变化,一般来说,质控检测要么更难执行,要么更耗费人力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
A survey of gamma camera and SPECT/CT quality control programs across a sample of public hospitals in Australia.

Performance testing of gamma cameras and single photon computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) systems is not subject to regulatory requirements across states and territories in Australia. Internationally recognised testing standards from organisations such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) describe methodologies for recommended tests. However, variations exist in suggested quality control (QC) schedules from professional bodies such as the Australia and New Zealand Society of Nuclear Medicine (ANZSNM). In this study, a survey was conducted to benchmark current QC programs across a selected sample of eight standalone and networked Australian public hospitals. Vendor-specific flood-field uniformity (intrinsic or extrinsic/system) verification without photomultiplier (PMT) tuning and CT QC were performed at all sites. Weekly and monthly PMT tuning followed by intrinsic flood-field verifications were performed at most sites. At least half of the sites performed monthly centre of rotation (COR) offset verifications. SPECT/CT alignment calibrations and verifications were undertaken by service engineers at all sites, and periodic verifications were performed by local staff at varying frequencies. Variations were observed for other periodic QC tests such as spatial resolution and planar sensitivity. Similarly, variations were observed for tests specific to whole-body systems and SPECT systems. Most sites checked daily and periodic QC results against pass/fail criteria set by vendors. Additional analyses of the QC results, including trend analysis and periodic reviews, were not common practice. The lack of regulatory requirements is likely to have led to variations in QC tests that are generally either harder to perform or are more labour intensive.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
110
期刊最新文献
PET/CT-based 3D multi-class semantic segmentation of ovarian cancer and the stability of the extracted radiomics features. PPG2RespNet: a deep learning model for respirational signal synthesis and monitoring from photoplethysmography (PPG) signal Ecg signal watermarking using QR decomposition Effect of mirror system and scanner bed of a flatbed scanner on lateral response artefact in radiochromic film dosimetry A deep learning phase-based solution in 2D echocardiography motion estimation
×
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