2022Wiadomości LekarskieRequires access

COMPUTED RADIOGRAPHY UTILIZATION FOR TELECOBALT60 TO ACHIEVE THE RADIATION CERTAINTY

Hendrik Hendrik, Massila Kamalrudin, Mohamad Razali, Schandra Purnamawati, Arundito Widikusumo

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim: This research aimed to show the achievement of Telecobalt60 radiation certainty using computed radiography, in comparation with non-verified computed radiography. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: This research is a quantitative study, randomized double-blind, and consecutive sampling design. The study was conducted by observing and com¬paring the data of verified computed radiography (VerC) computed radiograph for Telecobalt60 compared to the non-verified computed radiography (nVerC) Telecobalt60 data. RESULTS: Results: The results showed that there are significant statistical differences in several measurement characteristics between the verified computed radiography arm and the non-verified computed radiography arm. All of the value divergences of the verified computed radiography arm are less than 7 mm while the non-verified computed radiography arm are 7 mm or more (P<0.050). Furthermore, all of the edge aspect of measurement in the verified computed radiography arms are less than the non-verified computed radiography, all without manual block utilization (P<0.050). CONCLUSION: Conclusions: We conclude that Telecobalt60 radiation certainty is significantly better achieved by using computed radiography, when compared to non-verified computed radiography Telecobalt60 use. This research contributes to provide evidence based for better Telecobalt60 radiation accuracy and quality of radiotherapy outcome by using computed radiography.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: The aim: This research aimed to show the achievement of Telecobalt60 radiation certainty using computed radiography, in comparation with non-verified computed radiography. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: This research is a quantitative study, randomized double-blind, and consecutive sampling design. The study was conducted by observing and com¬paring the data of verified computed radiography (VerC) computed radiograph for Telecobalt60 compared to the non-verified computed radiography (nVerC) Telecobalt60 data. RESULTS: Results: The results showed that there are significant statistical differences in several measurement characteristics between the verified computed radiography arm and the non-verified computed radiography arm. All of the value divergences of the verified computed radiography arm are less than 7 mm while the non-verified computed radiography arm are 7 mm or more (P<0.050). Furthermore, all of the edge aspect of measurement in the verified computed radiography arms are less than the non-verified computed radiography, all without manual block utilization (P<0.050). CONCLUSION: Conclusions: We conclude that Telecobalt60 radiation certainty is significantly better achieved by using computed radiography, when compared to non-verified computed radiography Telecobalt60 use. This research contributes to provide evidence based for better Telecobalt60 radiation accuracy and quality of radiotherapy outcome by using computed radiography.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim: This research aimed to show the achievement of Telecobalt60 radiation certainty using computed radiography, in comparation with non-verified computed radiography. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: This research is a quantitative study, randomized double-blind, and consecutive sampling design. The study was conducted by observing and com¬paring the data of verified computed radiography (VerC) computed radiograph for Telecobalt60 compared to the non-verified computed radiography (nVerC) Telecobalt60 data. RESULTS: Results: The results showed that there are significant statistical differences in several measurement characteristics between the verified computed radiography arm and the non-verified computed radiography arm. All of the value divergences of the verified computed radiography arm are less than 7 mm while the non-verified computed radiography arm are 7 mm or more (P<0.050). Furthermore, all of the edge aspect of measurement in the verified computed radiography arms are less than the non-verified computed radiography, all without manual block utilization (P<0.050). CONCLUSION: Conclusions: We conclude that Telecobalt60 radiation certainty is significantly better achieved by using computed radiography, when compared to non-verified computed radiography Telecobalt60 use. This research contributes to provide evidence based for better Telecobalt60 radiation accuracy and quality of radiotherapy outcome by using computed radiography.

Key concepts: Radiography, Computed radiography, Medicine, Nuclear medicine, Computed tomography, Radiology, Medical physics, Image quality

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
COMPUTED RADIOGRAPHY UTILIZATION FOR TELECOBALT60 TO ACHIEVE THE RADIATION CERTAINTY — Research Paper | ScholarLens