ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Evaluation of a head rest prototype for rotational corrections in three degrees of freedom.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of a head rest prototype for rotational corrections in three degrees of freedom.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cranial stereotactic irradiations require accurate reproduction of the planning CT patient position at the time of treatment, including removal of rotational offsets. A device prototype was evaluated for potential clinical use to correct rotational positional offsets in image-guided radiotherapy workflow. Analysis was carried out with a prototype device "RPS head" by gKteso GmbH, rotatable up to 4° in three dimensions by hand wheels. A software tool accounts for the nonrectangular rotation axes and also indicates translational motions to be performed with the standard couch to correct the initial offset and translational shifts introduced by the rotational motion. The accuracy of angular corrections and positioning of an Alderson RANDO head phantom using the prototype device was evaluated for nine treatment plans for cranial targets. Corrections were obtained from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging. The phantom position was adjusted and the final position was then verified by another CBCT. The long-term stability of the prototype device was evaluated. Attenuation by the device along its three main axes was assessed. A planning study was performed to evaluate if regions of high-density material can be avoided during plan generation. The device enabled the accurate correction of rotational offsets in a clinical setup with a mean residual angular difference of (0.0 ± 0.1)° and a maximum deviation of 0.2°. Translational offsets were less than 1 mm. The device was stable over a period of 20 min, not changing the head support plate position by more than (0.7 ± 0.6) mm. The device contains high-density material in the adjustment mechanism and slightly higher density in the support structures. These can be avoided during planning generation maintaining comparable plan quality. The head positioning device can be used to correct rotational offsets in a clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.