Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Equipment Quality Control

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Digital Mammography

  • 3334 Accesses

Abstract

Mammography equipment must be evaluated to ensure that images will be of acceptable diagnostic quality with lowest radiation dose. Quality Assurance (QA) aims to provide systematic and constant improvement through a feedback mechanism to address the technical, clinical and training aspects [1, 2]; Quality Control (QC), in relation to mammography equipment, comprises a series of tests to determine equipment performance characteristics. The introduction of digital technologies promoted changes in QC tests and protocols and there are some tests that are specific for each manufacturer [2]. Within each country specific QC tests should be compliant with regulatory requirements and guidance [1]. Ideally, one mammography practitioner should take overarching responsibility for QC within a service, with all practitioners having responsibility for actual QC testing. All QC results must be documented to facilitate troubleshooting, internal audit and external assessment [3, 4].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Reis C, Pascoal A, Sakellaris T, Koutalonis M. Quality assurance and quality control in mammography: a review of available guidance worldwide. Insights Imaging [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2014 Jan 28];4:539–53. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23912879.

  2. Andolina V, Lyllé S. In: Sabatini P, editor. Mammographic imaging – a practical guide [Internet]. 3rd ed. Baltimore: Wolters Kluwer Health-Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011. p. 1–610. http://wk-trusted-auth.ipublishcentral.com/services/trustedauth/reader/isbn/9781605470313?partnerKey=w1WcOVItAWsvkr2CoOOemMyBXE6EFM/yNbWMX+Gkk7o=&userID=eswyJCiLE26c9Aec0R7noM3XN0JfIOReRnBtBC7nuadNdiW+8BB4hEt48lhJ1KPcjPMg40qOlB3jRFAxfyjAng==.

  3. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality assurance programme for digital mammography. Young. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  4. European Communities/EUREF. In: Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L, editors. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis [Internet]. 4th ed. http://www.euref.org/european-guidelines. Luxembourg: European Communities; 2006 [cited 19 Jan 2012]. p. 1–432. http://www.euref.org/european-guidelines.

  5. National Health Care Breast Screening Programme. Commissioning and routine testing of full field digital mammography systems – NHSBSP equipment report 0604. London; 2009. p. 1–58.

    Google Scholar 

  6. National Breast Screening Quality Assurance. In: Moore AC, Dance DR, Evans DS, Lawinski CP, Pitcher EM, Rust A, et al., editors, The commissioning and routine testing of mammographic X-ray systems. York: Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine; 2005. p. 1–146.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bosmans H, Engen R van, Heid P, Lazzari B, Schopphoven S, Thijssen M, et al. EUREF type testing protocol. Nijmegen: European Communities/EUREF; 2011. p. 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lelivelt H, Ongeval C van, Jacobs J, Bun P, Bosmans H, Engen R van, et al. EUREF type testing – clinical evaluation protocol. Nijmegen: European Communities/EUREF; 2010. p. 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  9. European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics: Working Group on Mammography. Quality Control in Digital Mammography [Internet]. Press. 2014. http://www.efomp.org/index.php/ct-menu-item-3/112-science/246-working-group-on-mammography.

  10. Ciraj-Bjelac O, Faj D, Stimac D, Kosutic D, Arandjic D, Brkic H. Good reasons to implement quality assurance in nationwide breast cancer screening programs in Croatia and Serbia: results from a pilot study. Eur J Radiol [Internet]. Elsevier Ireland Ltd; 2009 [cited 19 Jan 2012];78:122–8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19896314.

  11. Thierens H, Bosmans H, Buls N, De Hauwere A, Bacher K, Jacobs J, et al. Typetesting of physical characteristics of digital mammography systems for screening within the Flemish breast cancer screening programme. Eur J Radiol [Internet]. 2009 [cited 16 May 2011];70:539–48. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18374533.

  12. Ng K-H, Jamal N, DeWerd L. Global quality control perspective for the physical and technical aspects of screen-film mammograph--mage quality and radiation dose. Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry [Internet]. 2006 [cited 16 May 2011];121:445–51. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16709704.

  13. Avramova-Cholakova S, Vassileva J. Pilot study of patient and phantom breast dose measurements in Bulgaria. Polish J Med Phys Eng [Internet]. 2008 [cited 5 Aug 2011];14:21–32. http://versita.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.2478/v10013-008-0003-3.

  14. Zdesar U. Reference levels for image quality in mammography. Radiat Prot Dosim [Internet]. 2008 [cited 30 Mar 2011];129:170–2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18375465.

  15. Nikodemová D, Horváthová M, Salát D. Implementation of QA and QC standards in radiology in Slovakia. Radiat Prot Dosim [Internet]. 2005 [cited 16 May 2011];117:274–6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16461525.

  16. Shannoun F, Schanck JM, Scharpantgen A, Wagnon MC, Ben Daoud M, Back C. Organisational aspects of mammography screening in digital settings: first experiences of Luxembourg. Radiat Prot Dosim [Internet]. 2008 [cited 20 Dec 2010];129:195–8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18448438.

  17. Hemdal B, Herrnsdorf L, Andersson I, Bengtsson G, Heddson B, Olsson M. Average glandular dose in routine mammography screening using a Sectra MicroDose Mammography unit. Radiat Prot Dosim [Internet]. 2005 [cited 14 Dec 2011];114:436–43. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15933152.

  18. Committee on New Approaches to Early Detection and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer; National Cancer Policy Board; Board on Science, Technology and EPP and GAD. Saving Women’s Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis. In: Joy JE, Penhoet EE, Petitti DB, editors. Economic policy. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2005. p. 1–362.

    Google Scholar 

  19. National Healthcare System Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). Guidance notes for equipment evaluation: protocol for user evaluation of imaging equipment for mammographic screening and assessment NHSBSP equipment report 0703. Sheffield; 2007. p. 1–54.

    Google Scholar 

  20. International Atomic Energy Agency. In: International Atomic Energy Agency, editor. Quality assurance programme for screen film mammography. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2009. p. 1–158.

    Google Scholar 

  21. The National Cancer Screening Service. In: The National Cancer Screening Service Board, editor. Guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening [Internet]. 3rd ed. Natl Cancer Screen Serv Dublin: Members of the Quality Assurance Committee/The National Cancer Screening Service Board; 2008. p. 1–163. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21586679.

  22. Mackenzie A, Doylo P, Honey I, Marshall N, O’Neil J, Smail M. Measurements of the performance characteristics of diagnostic X-ray system: digital imaging system – IPEM report 32 Part VII. York; 2010. p. 1–125.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bick U, Diekmann F, editors. Digital Mammography [Internet]. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer; 2010 [cited 19 Mar 2014]. p. 1–222. http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/978-3-540-78450-0.

  24. Ayyala RS, Chorlton M, Behrman RH, Kornguth PJ, Slanetz PJ. Digital mammographic artifacts on full-field systems: what are they and how do I fix them? Radiographics [Internet]. 2008 [cited 20 May 2012];28:1999–2008. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19001654.

  25. Van Ongeval C, Jacobs J, Bosmans H. Artifacts in digital mammography. JBR-BRT. 2008;91:262–3.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Leeds. Leeds test objects. TOR MAs TOR MAX [Internet]. North Yorkshire; 2011;1–3. www.leedstestobjects.com.

  27. Brunner CC, RJ, Acciavatti MB, Bakic PR, Maidment ADA, Williams MB, Kaczmarek R, Chakrabarti K. Breast Imaging. In: Maidment ADA, Bakic PR, Gavenonis S, editors. 11th Int. Work. IWDM 2012, Philadelphia, 8–11 July 2012. Proc. Pennsylvania: Springer; 2012. p. 284–91.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Leeds Test Objects Ltd. Products Mammography TOR MAM [Internet]. Leeds Test Objects. 2014 [cited 3 Mar 2014]. http://www.leedstestobjects.com/modules/products/product_setup/file_library/TORMAMproductspecifications.pdf.php?module_name=products/product_setup&product_name=TOR MAM&group_name=Mammography.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Escola Superior de Tecnologia da Saúde de Lisboa (ESTeSL), Lisbon School of Health Technology, Lisbon, Portugal

    Cláudia Sá dos Reis

Authors
  1. Cláudia Sá dos Reis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cláudia Sá dos Reis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Salford, Salford, United Kingdom

    Peter Hogg

  2. Breast Care Unit, Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Chester, United Kingdom

    Judith Kelly

  3. The Nightingale Centre and Genesis Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester, Wythenshawe Hospital,, Manchester, United Kingdom

    Claire Mercer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

dos Reis, C.S. (2015). Equipment Quality Control. In: Hogg, P., Kelly, J., Mercer, C. (eds) Digital Mammography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04831-4_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04831-4_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04830-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04831-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation