Result: Implementing a Phase II Quality Control Protocol for a High Precision 137 Cs Dosimetry Calibration Irradiator.
Original Publication: New York.
Amurao M, Gress DA, Keenan MA, Halvorsen PH, Nye JA, Mahesh M. Quality management, quality assurance, and quality control in medical physics. J Appl Clin Med Phys 24:e13885; 2023.
Boria AJ, Rucinski BD, Abraham SA, Dawson AS, Jawad AH, Miklos JA, Kearfott KJ. 137Cs dosimeter irradiation facilities: calibration frequency, precision, and accuracy. Health Phys 112:357–363; 2017.
Chakraborti S, Human SW, Graham MA. Phase l statistical process control charts: an overview and some results. Qual Eng 2152–2162; 2008.
Chung LK, Piersma NP, Kearfott KJ. Radon kinetics in a basement space measured with different devices. Health Phys 120:582–588; 2021.
Costigan SA, McAtee JL III, Somers WM, Huchton RL. An operational health physics quality assurance program. Health Phys 70:59b; 1996.
Dewey SC, Kearfott KJ. Calibration drift in a laboratory high purity germanium detector spectrometry system. Health Phys 94:S27–33; 2008.
Eisenhower EH. Measurement quality assurance. Health Phys 55:207–213; 1988.
Evans P, Marinello G. Quality control of treatment delivery. Handbook of radiotherapy physics: theory and practice. New York: Taylor and Francis. 2007; 867–95.
Gupta BC. Statistical quality control: using Minitab, R, JMPand Python. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2021.
Harvey JA, Haverland NP, Kearfott KJ. Characterization of the glow-peak fading properties of six common thermoluminescent materials. Appl Radiat Isot 68:1988–2000; 2010.
Harvey JA, Kearfott KJ. The effects of high ambient radon on thermoluminescence dosimetry readings. Radiat Protect Dosim 147:491–497; 2011.
Harvey JA, Thomas EM, Kearfott KJ. Quantification of various factors influencing the precision of thermoluminescent detector calibrations for new and used chip sets. Health Phys 100(Suppl 2):eS79–91; 2011.
Harvey JA, Kearfott KJ. Effects of high ambient temperature on glow-peak fading properties of lif:Mg,ti thermoluminescent dosemeters. Radiat Protect Dosim 149:109–115; 2012.
Harvey JA, Kearfott KJ, Rafique M. Dose response linearity and practical factors influencing minimum detectable dose for various thermoluminescent detector types. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 303:1711–1718; 2015.
Kearfott KJ. Performance of a well counter and a dose calibrator for quantitative positron emission tomography. Health Phys 57:623–629; 1989.
Kearfott KJ. Dual-lumen catheters: quality control tests for radiopacity. Int J Rad Appl Instrum A 42:463–469; 1991.
Kearfott KJ, Rucker RH. Median polish for quality assurance of a pet scanner. J Comput Assist Tomogr 13:932–939; 1989.
Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, Yin FF, Simon W, Dresser S, Serago C, Aguirre F, Ma L, Arjomandy B, Liu C, Sandin C, Holmes T. Task group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys 36:4197–4212; 2009.
Liu K, Golduber RM, Trimas DJ, Abraham SA, Latosz LV, Mapes JL, Miller JM, Kearfott KJ. Calibration and statistical performance of Al 2 O 3 :C optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters with and without annealing using a 137 Cs source. Health Phys 116:42–59; 2019.
Malicki J. The importance of accurate treatment planning, delivery, and dose verification. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 17:63–65; 2012.
Mapes JL, Liu K, Abraham SA, Wilhelm AS, Latosz LV, Kearfott KJ. Setup and characterization of a 137 Cs dosimetry calibration source in a space-constrained environment. Health Phys 115:569–580; 2018.
Miklos JA, Plato P. Performance testing of personnel dosimetry services: a revised procedures manual. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; NUREG/CR-2892; 1983. Available at https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6363812 . Accessed 31 December 2023.
Montgomery DC. Introduction to statistical quality control. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2019.
Nelson LS. The Shewhart control chart—tests for special causes. J Qual Technol 16:238–239; 1984. DOI:10.1080/00224065.1984.11978921. (PMID: 10.1080/00224065.1984.11978921)
Nelson LS. Control charts: rational subgroups and effective applications. J Qual Technol 20:73–75; 1988.
Noey JD, Golduber RM, Kearfott KJ. Analysis of long-term quality control data for a 137 Cs dosimetry calibration source. Health Phys 120:227–242; 2021.
Noey JD, Xiao JB, DiFulvio A, Sulieman NA, Carmona MA, Chung LK, El-Amir IN, Frank SJ, Liu K, Schiefer K, Seekamp JM, Sosa CS, Trimas DJ, Vyas AP, Kearfott KJ. The effects of radiation and emitted light transport on the positional response of 11 cm × 42.5 cm × 5.5 cm NaI(Tl) detectors. Health Phys 117:362–377; 2019.
Parker LW, Harvey JA, Kearfott KJ. An integrated system for the beta, gamma, and neutron calibration and storage of thermoluminescent dosimeters for a research laboratory. Health Phys 100:S43–S49; 2011.
Ravichandran J. Six sigma-based x-bar control chart for continuous quality improvement. Int J Qual Res 10:257; 2016.
Rossum GV, Drake FL. Python 3 reference manual. CreateSpace; 2009.
Smith T, Cao S, Kearfott KJ. Temporal fluctuations in indoor background gamma radiation using NaI(Tl). Health Phys 114:360–372; 2018.
West WG, Kearfott KJ, Bernal SM. The sunlight OSL response of a commercially available alpha-Al 2 O 3 :C personnel dosimetry material. Radiat Protect Dosim 119:344–349; 2006.
4T2E65IAR7 (Cesium-137)
Further information
Abstract: In medical physics, rigorous quality assurance and quality control protocols are vital for precise dose delivery applications. In many health physics applications, the allowable uncertainty for various processes is often greater than that of medical physics due to looser safety ties. This results in less demand for quality control and uncertainty analyses, since these may not be needed. However, certain applications can benefit from a comprehensive quality control program, as it may yield important insights, such as air kerma monitoring in dosimetry calibrations for environmental and low-dose applications. By implementing a thorough quality control program tailored to specific contexts and needs, uncertainties associated with dose measurements can be quantified with greater accuracy and reliability. This proactive approach not only ensures the integrity of data collected but also enhances understanding of the measured doses. For these reasons, a comprehensive quality control initiative was implemented following documented failures in a 137 Cs dosimetry calibration irradiator. This involved systematic charge collection using NIST-traceable ion chambers to observe long-term changes. A Phase I quality control protocol was previously implemented, which employed Shewhart control charts and Nelson's rules to analyze various datasets subgrouped under different conditions. This study addresses the development of a Phase II protocol, which focuses more on uncertainty quantification of systematic errors and irradiator changes, and air kerma precision for dosimetry calibrations. A designed experiment was performed to identify how much systematic errors influence the air kerma. Emphasis was placed on stricter quality assurance protocols, continuous data collection, and additional control charts to monitor short-term changes, such as exponentially weighted moving average control charts. A pre-irradiation control process was implemented to verify that the total air kerma met the measurement quality objective and to show how various uncertainties were applied before calibration. This study indicates how uncertainty is applied given observed air kerma measurements from the irradiator. Ongoing efforts aim to streamline the quality control procedure, ensure consistent data collection, and assess its impact on dosimetry applications.
(Copyright © 2024 Health Physics Society.)