Display options
Cite
Das I, Chu C, Conlon J, et al. SU-E-T-97: Intra and Inter Variability in Beam Data Commissioning among Water Phantom Scanning Systems. Med Phys. 2012;39(6):3725doi: 10.1118/1.4735154.
Das, I., Chu, C., Conlon, J., Neck, D., & Gibbons, J. (2012). SU-E-T-97: Intra and Inter Variability in Beam Data Commissioning among Water Phantom Scanning Systems. Medical physics, 39(6), 3725. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4735154
Das, I, et al. "SU-E-T-97: Intra and Inter Variability in Beam Data Commissioning among Water Phantom Scanning Systems." Medical physics vol. 39,6 (2012): 3725. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4735154
Das I, Chu C, Conlon J, Neck D, Gibbons J. SU-E-T-97: Intra and Inter Variability in Beam Data Commissioning among Water Phantom Scanning Systems. Med Phys. 2012 Jun;39(6):3725. doi: 10.1118/1.4735154. PMID: 28517127.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Med Phys. 2012 Jun;39(6):3725. doi: 10.1118/1.4735154.

SU-E-T-97: Intra and Inter Variability in Beam Data Commissioning among Water Phantom Scanning Systems.

Medical physics

I Das, C Chu, J Conlon, D Neck, J Gibbons

Affiliations

  1. Indiana University-School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN.
  2. Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
  3. West Des Moines, IA.

PMID: 28517127 DOI: 10.1118/1.4735154

Abstract

PURPOSE: There are many water-phantom scanning systems with advanced features to collect accurate commissioning data. However the intra- and inter-variability of commissioning data has not been reported which is attempted in this study.

METHODS: Four vendors with modern water-phantom scanning systems; PTW, Sun Nuclear (SN), Standard Imaging (SI) and IBA were invited to an institution to demonstrate beam data collection. Each system was used to collect percent depth dose (PDD) and profiles several times in a day with their choice of detector for four different machines for photon and electron beam commissioning. This provided information on intra-variability. At the end, each vendor was allowed to setup and collect data on a single unit for inter-variability. All data were sent to a central location for analysis and evaluation.

RESULTS: The depth dose and profiles for 2×2cm

CONCLUSIONS: Intra- and inter-variability among various scanning system are very small indicting that all modern systems if used properly could collect data within±0.2% accuracy. The selection of device should be based on institutional comfort and personal preference of software and hardware. This study provides unique opportunity to compare data among systems which is otherwise not possible.

© 2012 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Keywords: Computer software; Data analysis; Electron beams; Image detection systems; Particle beam detectors; Photons

Publication Types