Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Australian diagnostic reference levels for multi detector computed tomography

  • Scientific Paper
  • Published:
Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) is undertaking web based surveys to obtain data to establish national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for diagnostic imaging. The first set of DRLs to be established are for multi detector computed tomography (MDCT). The survey samples MDCT dosimetry metrics: dose length product (DLP, mGy.cm) and volume computed tomography dose index (CTDIvol, mGy), for six common protocols/habitus: Head, Neck, Chest, AbdoPelvis, ChestAbdoPelvis and Lumbar Spine from individual radiology clinics and platforms. A practice reference level (PRL) for a given platform and protocol is calculated from a compliant survey containing data collected from at least ten patients. The PRL is defined as the median of the DLP/CTDIvol values for a single compliant survey. Australian National DRLs are defined as the 75th percentile of the distribution of the PRLs for each protocol and age group. Australian National DRLs for adult MDCT have been determined in terms of DLP and CTDIvol. In terms of DLP the national DRLs are 1,000 mGy cm, 600 mGy cm, 450 mGy cm, 700 mGy cm, 1,200 mGy cm, and 900 mGy cm for the protocols Head, Neck, Chest, AbdoPelvis, ChestAbdoPelvis and Lumbar Spine respectively. Average dose values obtained from the European survey Dose Datamed I reveal Australian doses to be higher by comparison for four out of the six protocols. The survey is ongoing, allowing practices to optimise dose delivery as well as allowing the periodic update of DRLs to reflect changes in technology and technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hart D, Hillier MC, Wall BF (2009) National reference doses for common radiographic, fluoroscopic and dental X-ray examinations in the UK. Br J Radiol 82(973):1–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wall BF (2005) Implementation of DRLs in the UK. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 114(1–3):183–187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wall BF (2001) Diagnostic reference levels—the way forward. Br J Radiol 74(885):785–788

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Commission E (1997) Council Directive 97/43/EURATOM of 30 June 1997 on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionising radiation in relation to medical exposure, and repealing Directive 84/466/Euratom. Off J Eur Communities L180:40

  5. Services AGDoH. Medicare benefits schedule. MBS statistics 2010. (cited 2011). http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/provider/medicare/mbs.jsp#N10030

  6. Commission E (2008) European guidance on estimating population doses from medical X-ray procedures. Radiation protection no 154

  7. Bongartz G, Golding S, Jurik A, Leonardi M, van Persijn van Meerten E, Rodriguez R et al (2004) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Funded by the European Commission

  8. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn M (2006) National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003. Br J Radiol 79(948):968–980

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Conover WJ (1971) Practical nonparametric statistics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. McCollough C, Branham T, Herlihy V, Bhargavan M, Robbins L, Bush K et al (2011) Diagnostic reference levels From the ACR CT accreditation program. J Am Coll Radiol 8(11):795–803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Compagnone G, Pagan L, Bergamini C (2005) Local diagnostic reference levels in standard X-ray examinations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 113(1):54–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wallace AB, Goergen SK, Schick D, Soblusky T, Jolley D (2010) Multidetector CT dose: clinical practice improvement strategies from a successful optimization program. J Am Coll Radiol 7(8):614–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The Authors would like to thank every practice that has participated in the survey to date.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine Section, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, 619 Lower Plenty Road, Yallambie, Melbourne, VIC, 3085, Australia

    Anna Hayton, Anthony Wallace, Paul Marks, Keith Edmonds, David Tingey & Peter Johnston

Authors
  1. Anna Hayton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Wallace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Marks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Keith Edmonds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David Tingey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Peter Johnston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Hayton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hayton, A., Wallace, A., Marks, P. et al. Australian diagnostic reference levels for multi detector computed tomography. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 36, 19–26 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-013-0180-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-013-0180-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation