In the last decade, various imaging techniques\ protocols have been utilised in chest radiography examination to optimise dose and image quality. In addition, a range of X-ray image receptors and X-ray machines with diverse manufacturers there are available with different performances [1–3]. Consequently, these factors lead to a variation in image quality and radiation dose between X-ray units for the same radiography examination. This study aims to investigate image quality, lesion visibility and radiation exposure when imaging a Lungman adult anthropomorphic chest phantom using routine...

Image acquisition The anthropomorphic adult chest Lungman phantom produced by ‘Kyoto Kagaku’ Kyoto Kagaku, (with and without a ‘fat jacket’ to represent increased BMI) [4] (Figure 1) was used to simulate the normal size and obese adult patient respectively. The phantom was imaged in 17 X-ray units located in eight different hospitals within the north west of England using their existing routine adult chest x-ray protocols, and the images were collected from the hospitals in DICOM format. Perceptual image quality evaluation The general image quality...

The average observer scoring for the general visual image quality, with and without a ‘fat jacket’, images against the entrance surface dose (ESD) for each X-ray unit between and within hospitals are illustrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4 respectively. Wide variations in radiation dose and image quality were observed. For phantom without the fat jacket, IQ ranged from 12.00-21.33, LV 6.00-11.67, SNR 13.39-67.39, CNR 9.60-45.51, CI 18.75-66.51, ESD 28.34-200.35 µGy and FOM 0.17- 1.20. With fat jacket, IQ ranged from 14.17-23.67, LV 5.83-13.67, SNR...

Between and within hospitals there was a considerable variation in image quality (IQ), lesion visibility (LV), SNR, CNR, CI and radiation dose (ESD). These results are likely to reflect the different types of x-ray imaging equipment and protocols used between the hospitals and X-ray units.

[1] M. D. Cohen, R. Markowitz, J. Hill, W. Huda, P. Babyn, and B. Apgar, “Quality assurance: A comparison study of radiographic exposure for neonatal chest radiographs at 4 academic hospitals,” Pediatr. Radiol., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 668–673, 2012. [2] W. J. H. Veldkamp, L. J. M. Kroft, M. V. Boot, B. J. A. Mertens, and J. Geleijns, “Contrast-detail evaluation and dose assessment of eight digital chest radiography systems in clinical practice,” Eur. Radiol., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 333–341, 2006. [3] H. Manninen,...