Practical application of AAPM Report 270 in display quality assurance: A report of Task Group 270.

displays quality assurance

Journal

Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Historique:
received: 16 01 2020
revised: 24 04 2020
accepted: 27 04 2020
pubmed: 19 7 2020
medline: 19 7 2020
entrez: 19 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Published in January 2019, AAPM Report 270 provides an update to the recommendations of the AAPM's "TG18" report. Report 270 provides new definitions of display types, updated testing patterns, and revised performance standards for the modern, flat-panel displays used as part of medical image acquisition and review. The focus of the AAPM report is on consistent image quality and appearance, and how to establish a quality assurance program to achieve those two goals. This work highlights some of the key takeaways of AAPM Report 270 and makes comparisons with existing recommendations from other references. It also provides guidance for establishing a display quality assurance program for different-sized institutions. Finally, it describes future challenges for display quality assurance and what work remains.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32681556
doi: 10.1002/mp.14227
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e920-e928

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Informations de copyright

© 2020 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Références

Bevins N, Flynn M, Silosky M, Marsh R, Walz-Flannigan A, Badano A. AAPM Report 270: Display Quality Assurance. American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2019. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_270.pdf
Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al.Online Only Report No. OR03 - Assessment of Display Performance for Medical Imaging Systems. American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2005. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/detail.asp?docid=153
Ruckdeschel T, Keener C, Kofler J, et al. ACR-AAPM-SIIM Technical Standard for Electronic Practice of Medical Imaging. American College of Radiology; 2017.
American College of Radiology. Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Quality Control Manual; 2015.
American College of Radiology. Computed Tomography: Quality Control Manual; 2017.
American College of Radiology. Digital Mammography: Quality Control Manual; 2018.
American Association of Physicists in Medicine. PP 1-J: Definition of A Qualified Medical Physicist; 2018. https://www.aapm.org/org/policies/details.asp?type=PPid=449
Badano A, Revie C, Casertano A, et al. Consistency and standardization of color in medical imaging: a consensus report. J Dig Imaging. 2015;28:41-52.
Badano A, Wang J, Boynton P, et al. Technical Note: gray tracking in medical color displays-a report of Task Group 196. Med Phys. 2016;43:4017-4022.
International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC 62563-1:2009+AMD1:2016 Medical electrical equipment - Medical image display systems - Part1: Evaluation methods; 2016.
Badano A, Bevins N, Flynn M, et al.Considerations for the Use of Handheld Image Viewers: A report of AAPM Task Group 260. American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2018.

Auteurs

Nicholas B Bevins (NB)

Department of Radiology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA.

Michael S Silosky (MS)

Department of Radiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.

Aldo Badano (A)

Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.

Rebecca M Marsh (RM)

Department of Radiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.

Michael J Flynn (MJ)

Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA.

Alisa I Walz-Flannigan (AI)

Department of Radiology, Marshfield Clinic Health System, Marshfield, WI, 54449, USA.

Classifications MeSH