Initial Investigation Using Statistical Process Control For Quality Control Of Accelerator Beam Steering. - Info and Reading Options

The Internet Archive:

This article is from <a href="//archive.org/search.php?query=journaltitle%3A%28Radiation%20Oncology%20(London,%20England)%29" rel="nofollow">Radiation Oncology (London, England)</a>, <a href="//archive.org/search.php?query=journaltitle%3A%28Radiation%20Oncology%20(London,%20England)%29%20AND%20volume%3A%286%29" rel="nofollow">volume 6</a>.<h2>Abstract</h2>Background: This study seeks to increase clinical operational efficiency and accelerator beam consistency by retrospectively investigating the application of statistical process control (SPC) to linear accelerator beam steering parameters to determine the utility of such a methodology in detecting changes prior to equipment failure (interlocks actuated). Methods: Steering coil currents (SCC) for the transverse and radial planes are set such that a reproducibly useful photon or electron beam is available. SCC are sampled and stored in the control console computer each day during the morning warm-up. The transverse and radial - positioning and angle SCC for photon beam energies were evaluated using average and range (Xbar-R) process control charts (PCC). The weekly average and range values (subgroup n = 5) for each steering coil were used to develop the PCC. SCC from September 2009 (annual calibration) until two weeks following a beam steering failure in June 2010 were evaluated. PCC limits were calculated using the first twenty subgroups. Appropriate action limits were developed using conventional SPC guidelines. Results: PCC high-alarm action limit was set at 6 standard deviations from the mean. A value exceeding this limit would require beam scanning and evaluation by the physicist and engineer. Two low alarms were used to indicate negative trends. Alarms received following establishment of limits (week 20) are indicative of a non-random cause for deviation (Xbar chart) and/or an uncontrolled process (R chart). Transverse angle SCC for 6 MV and 15 MV indicated a high-alarm 90 and 108 days prior to equipment failure respectively. A downward trend in this parameter continued, with high-alarm, until failure. Transverse position and radial angle SCC for 6 and 15 MV indicated low-alarms starting as early as 124 and 116 days prior to failure, respectively. Conclusion: Radiotherapy clinical efficiency and accelerator beam consistency may be improved by instituting SPC methods to monitor the beam steering process and detect abnormal changes prior to equipment failure.PACS numbers: 87.55n, 87.55qr, 87.56bd

Search for “Initial Investigation Using Statistical Process Control For Quality Control Of Accelerator Beam Steering.” downloads:

Visit our Downloads Search page to see if downloads are available.

Find “Initial Investigation Using Statistical Process Control For Quality Control Of Accelerator Beam Steering.” in Libraries Near You:

Read or borrow “Initial Investigation Using Statistical Process Control For Quality Control Of Accelerator Beam Steering.” from your local library.

• The WorldCat Libraries Catalog: Find a copy of “Initial Investigation Using Statistical Process Control For Quality Control Of Accelerator Beam Steering.” at a library near you.