Development of distance accuracy measurement program for quality control of diagnostic ultrasound system

Evaluating the performance of a diagnostic ultrasound system is important. Above all, establishing standards for such evaluations in an objective and systematic way is critical. However, quality control is currently measured based on subjective judgment of an observer. Against this background, this...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of the Korean Physical Society Vol. 63; no. 11; pp. 2232 - 2238
Main Authors Kim, Yon-Min, Kim, Moon-Chan, Han, Dong-Kyoon, Cho, Jae-Hwan, Kim, Sang-Hyun
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.12.2013
한국물리학회
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Evaluating the performance of a diagnostic ultrasound system is important. Above all, establishing standards for such evaluations in an objective and systematic way is critical. However, quality control is currently measured based on subjective judgment of an observer. Against this background, this study intended to suggest quantified and objective data that would enable inter-observer variation to be overcome. Five radiological technologists used an ATS-539 multi-purpose ultrasound phantom to conduct measurements in the predetermined method. A digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) standard image was obtained in an ultrasound system by using a self-developed software to measure the accuracy of the distance before the 95% confidence interval was calculated. In order to examine the accuracy of the distance in longitudinal and transverse measurements, we conducted t-tests to evaluate the significance for the results of quality control that was performed manually for the past one year and for the results of quality control that was performed by using software with the same equipment. For the longitudinal and the transverse measurements, the 95% confidence intervals were 100.96–101.29 mm and 83.18–84.26 mm, respectively. The computerized longitudinal measurement showed no significant difference from the manual measurement ( p > 0.05). The results of measurements using of software showed a higher reproducibility.
Bibliography:G704-000411.2013.63.11.028
ISSN:0374-4884
1976-8524
DOI:10.3938/jkps.63.2232