Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Suleiman, O. H.
Right arrow Articles by Slayton, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Suleiman, O. H.
Right arrow Articles by Slayton, R. J.

Radiology, Vol 185, 25-28, Copyright © 1992 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Automatic film processing: analysis of 9 years of observations

OH Suleiman, BJ Conway, FG Rueter and RJ Slayton
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD 20857.

A survey method known as the sensitometric technique for the evaluation of processing (STEP) has been used to monitor processing speed of over 2,000 automatic film processors in hospitals, private offices, and mammography facilities since 1981. Analysis of data obtained through this program revealed underprocessing at 33% (76 of 231) of observed hospitals in 1987, 7% (13 of 179) of mammography facilities in 1988, and 42% (101 of 241) of private practices in 1989. Underprocessing at mammography facilities decreased from 18% (25 of 139) in 1985, which was contrary to the trend in hospitals. The consequence of underprocessing is higher radiation exposure and a degradation in film contrast. Evaluation of automatic film processors is a necessary part of any comprehensive evaluation of a diagnostic radiography facility. The STEP procedure was designed only as a field survey test; to ensure optimal conditions for obtainment of diagnostic quality radiographs, facilities should perform quality assurance evaluations of their processing equipment and verify that processing recommendations of manufacturers are being followed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. C. Spelic, R. V. Kaczmarek, and O. H. Suleiman
Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends Survey of Abdomen and Lumbosacral Spine Radiography
Radiology, July 1, 2004; 232(1): 115 - 125.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. V. Kaczmarek, B. J. Conway, R. O. Slayton, and O. H. Suleiman
Results of a Nationwide Survey of Chest Radiography: Comparison with Results of a Previous Study
Radiology, June 1, 2000; 215(3): 891 - 896.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
O. H. Suleiman, D. C. Spelic, J. L. McCrohan, G. R. Symonds, and F. Houn
Mammography in the 1990s: The United States and Canada
Radiology, February 1, 1999; 210(2): 345 - 351.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1992 by the Radiological Society of North America.