Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32495517›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2020

An evaluation of the effect of tube potential on clinical image quality using direct digital detectors for pelvis and lumbar spine radiographs.

Nicole E Peacock, Adam L Steward, Peter J Riley

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Contemporary research in digital radiography.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Nicole E PeacockDepartment of Medical Imaging, Western Health, Footscray, VIC, Australia.
Adam L StewardDepartment of Medical Imaging, Western Health, Footscray, VIC, Australia.
Peter J RileySchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHigh kVp techniques, 15% or 10-kVp rules, are well-known dose reduction methods. Traditionally, the use of high tube potential (i.e. increased kVp) is associated with decreased radiographic contrast and overall image quality. Recent studies suggest contrast and image quality are not heavily reliant on kVp with digital systems. This study aims to assess the effects of the high tube potential technique on clinical radiographic image quality when using digital systems, to validate high kVp as a dose saving technique.

methodsA selection of comparable pelvis and lumbar spine radiographs were collected from the hospital's picture archiving and communication system (PACS), with technical factors recorded. All clinical radiographs were assessed by 5 senior radiographers using a 15-point visual grading analysis (VGA) rubric.

resultsFor 40 AP pelvis radiographs and 40 lateral lumbar spine radiographs, reduction in the dose area product (DAP) with higher kVp is seen. Average pelvis DAP at 75 kVp = 14.06 mGy.cm

conclusionsThe high tube potential techniques allowed for reduced patient radiation doses whilst showing no degradation of diagnostic image quality in a clinical setting. This study successfully validates the high kVp technique as a useful tool for reducing patient radiation doses whilst maintaining high diagnostic image quality for digital pelvis and lumbar spine radiography.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraePelvisRadiation DosageHumansRadiographic Image EnhancementkVpRadiation DosageRadiation IonisingRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiographic Image QualityRadiographyX-Rays

Identifiers

PMID32495517
PMCPMC7753839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.