PubMed · 5206969
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
E F Lutterbeck. 1971. Environmental control: radiological aspects.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-2092(07)61870-5
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A set of four 4 MV photon beam compensators were produced, one for each field of a Hodgkins Disease treatment plan. The resultant dose profiles at various depths were measured by an ion chamber in water and by Kodak X-Omat V film in a Solid Water phantom, and compared to the doses calculated by a GE RT/Plan treatment planning computer. After normalisation and correction for the film's non-linear dose response, the film and ion chamber results compared well with each other. They both showed cold spots of 80% in the junction region of the four fields which were not shown on the computed isodose plan. Film dosimetry is faster than ion chamber dosimetry and is shown to be accurate enough to use for measuring the dose uniformity of compensated beams.
Correction is necessary to account for the detector size in clinical dosimetry of photon and electron beams. This correction is due to the absorbed dose gradient present in a finite-size detector. Further corrections are necessary when the detector and phantom materials are not the same. These corrections are due to the perturbation in the charged-particle fluence. Generally these corrections are applied to measurements along the central axis of the beam. Cross beam profile measurements, however, are not usually corrected for detector size. The ionization profile is also usually assumed to be equivalent to the absorbed dose profile. We have corrected the ionization chamber size effect by two approaches: extrapolation of measurements to zero detector size and deconvolution of measurements using a simple model for the detector response function. We have measured absorbed dose profiles to water using a small water-equivalent plastic scintillation detector. Film profile measurements were also studied. The ionization profile corrected for detector size and absorbed dose profile were not equal, probably due to loss of charged-particle equilibrium in the beam edges. For ionization chamber measurements, knowledge of the charged-particle spectrum is needed to convert ionization to absorbed dose to water. This is not necessary for relative absorbed dose measurements under charged-particle equilibrium. Film has been shown to be a straightforward and reliable method for cross beam profile measurements.