Image Quality and Entrance Surface Dose Evaluation of Lateral Cervical Spine: A Study Using Grid and Non-Grid Techniques

Document Type : Original Paper


International Islamic University Malaysia


Introduction: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of grid and non-grid techniques in the lateral cervical spine radiography on image quality and entrance surface dose (ESD). Although image quality and radiation doses have been studied by researchers, there is still a dearth of information on image quality and patient dose with different techniques.
Material and Methods: The radiographs of the lateral cervical spine were acquired by positioning the RANDO phantom abutting the erect bucky while using the grid and non-grid techniques. This study benefited from using a 24 cm x 30 cm Fuji standard cassette type imaging plate. A Leeds TOR test tool was utilized for relative comparison of image quality. The ESD of each examination was determined by using the optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter.
Results: The increased kilovoltage (kVp) resulted in the reduction of ESD whether moving grid, stationary grid, or non-grid techniques were utilized. Significant differences in terms of contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution were indicated when comparing the grid technique to that of the non-grid technique (i.e., χ2=8 and 5, 16 respectively, p<0.05"> ). The results also indicated significant differences in ESD when using the moving grid, stationary grid, and non-grid techniques (i.e., χ2=7.2, 16p<0.05"> ).
Conclusion: Significant differences in image quality and ESD were indicated when grid and non-grid techniques were used in the lateral cervical spine radiography. A non-grid with the highest appropriate kVp is recommended as the air gap acts as a grid, resulting in acceptable image quality with reduction in ESD. 


Main Subjects

  1. References


    1. Berges M , Perry MJ. Improved Lateral Cervical Spine Technique. Radiologic Technology. 2014; 85(4): 447-51.
    2. Simpson AK, Whang PG, Jonisch A, Haims A , Grauer JN. The Radiation Exposure Associated with Cervical and Lumbar Spine Radiographs. Journal of Spinal Discord Technologist. 2008; 21(6): 409-12.
    3. Shrestha S, Maharhan S, Khanal U , Humagain M. Evaluation of image quality in cervical spine lateral radiographs. Journal of Chitwan Medical College. 2016; 6(15): 30-3.
    4. Carlton RR , Adler AM. Principles of radiographic imaging: An art and a science. New York: Delmar; 2006.
    5. Bontrager KL , Lampignanno JP. Textbook of radiographic positioning and related anatomy. Elsevier, St Louis-Missouri; 2014.
    6. Callaway WJ. Mosby’s Comprehensive Review of Radiography: The Complete Study Guide and Career Planner. Elsevier, St Louis-Missouri; 2016.
    7. Bell N, Erskine M , Warren-Forward H. Lateral cervical spine examinations: an evaluation of dose for grid and non-grid techniques. Radiography. 2003; 9(1): 43-52.
    8. Wang J, Xu J , Baladandayuthapani V. Contrast sensitivity of digital imaging display systems: Contrast threshold dependency on object type and implications for monitor quality assurance and quality control in PACS. Medical Physics. 2009; 36(8): 3682-92.
    9. Field DT, Bell L, Mount SW, Williams CM , Butler LT. Flavonoids and Visual Function. Handbook of Nutrition, Diet and the Eye. 2014; 403-11.
    10. Keating M , Grange S. Image quality in the anteroposterior cervical spine radiograph: Comparison between moving, stationary and non-grid techniques in a lamb neck. Radiography. 2011; 17(2): 139-44.
    11. Chan CT , Fung KK. Dose Optimization in Lumbar Spine Radiographic Examination by Air Gap Method in CR and DR systems: A Phantom Study. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences. 2015; 46(1): 65-77.
    12. Yanch J C, Behrman RH, Hendricks MJ , McCall JH. Increased Radiation Dose to Overweight and Obese Patient from Radiographic Examinations. Radiology. 2009; 252(1): 128-39.
    13. Sherer MAS, Visconti P, Ritenour ER , Haynes K.  Radiation Protection in Medical Radiography. St Louis: Elsevier; 2012.
    14. Moey SF, Shazli ZA, Sayed I. Dose Evaluation for Common Digital Radiographic Examinations in Selected Hospitals in Pahang Malaysia. Iran J Med Phys. 2017; 14: 155-61.
    15. Mitchell EL , Furey P. Prevention of radiation injury from medical imaging. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2011; 53(1): 22S-7S.
    16. Herrmann TL, Fauber TL, Gill J, Hoffman C, Orth DK, Peterson PA, et al. Best practices in digital radiography. Radiol Technol. 2012; 84(1): 83-9.
    17. Moey SF, Shazli ZA. Optimization of Dose and Image Quality in Full-field Digital and Computed Radiography Systems for Common Digital Radiographic Examinations. Iran J Med Phys. 2018; 15: 28-38.