Comparison of Vendor-Dependent Versus Commercially-Available, Independent LINAC Quality Assurance (QA) for Daily QA
C Stambaugh*, C Melhus, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA
Therapy General ePoster
Category: Scientific:Therapy Physics:Photon External Beam Therapy:QA of Linear Accelerators and Ancillary Systems
Purpose: To investigate and compare time efficiency, data collected, and results of vendor-based versus independent-QA platforms for daily LINAC QA.
Methods: Time needed to perform daily QA (DQA) on a single LINAC was collected for three months. TG-142-compliant DQA included dosimetry checks (4 photon, 4 electron beams); imaging checks (planar kV & MV, kV CBCT); and mechanical & safety checks using a commercially-available, web-based, independent QA platform (SunCHECK Machine). Additionally, a set of 5 (rotating through 10) vendor-specific machine checks were performed (Machine Performance Check). Data were collected to identify the time required to complete vendor-specific, independent, and total DQA. Independent-QA was further analyzed to determine time spent on dosimetry checks. Output collected from both methods was compared using a Wilcoxon rank sum test for 6MV, 6MeV and 10FFF, and center shift was compared for 6MV.
Results: Total time for DQA averaged 32 minutes (21-62 min, σ=7 min), vendor-specific tests averaged 11 minutes (7-45 min, σ=7 min) and included geometry checks on isocenter, collimator, gantry and couch; output & uniformity for 2-3 photon and 2-3 electron energies; and center shift for photon energies. Independent-QA averaged 21 minutes (13-39 min, σ=5 min). Six minutes (4-12 min, σ=1 min) was spent on dosimetry checks, which included output, symmetry, flatness, energy, field size and center shift for 4 photon and 4 electron energies. The remainder was spent on imaging and mechanical/safety checks. Differences in measured output did not reach significance for any beam (p=0.288, 6MV; 0.704, 6MeV; 0.197, 10FFF), while center shift results showed a significant difference (p<0.001)
Conclusion: This work indicates that vendor-dependent and an independent-QA platform obtain similar output results, but beam center-shifts are dependent on the platform. Additionally, the independent QA platform can obtain dosimetry results more efficiently and can provide a more user-friendly interface for complete DQA data collection.
Taxonomy:TH- External Beam- Photons: Quality Assurance - Linear accelerator
Comparison of Vendor-Dependent Versus Commercially-Available, Independent LINAC Quality Assurance (QA) for Daily QA
C Stambaugh*, C Melhus, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA
Therapy General ePoster
Category: Scientific:Therapy Physics:Photon External Beam Therapy:QA of Linear Accelerators and Ancillary Systems
Purpose: To investigate and compare time efficiency, data collected, and results of vendor-based versus independent-QA platforms for daily LINAC QA.
Methods: Time needed to perform daily QA (DQA) on a single LINAC was collected for three months. TG-142-compliant DQA included dosimetry checks (4 photon, 4 electron beams); imaging checks (planar kV & MV, kV CBCT); and mechanical & safety checks using a commercially-available, web-based, independent QA platform (SunCHECK Machine). Additionally, a set of 5 (rotating through 10) vendor-specific machine checks were performed (Machine Performance Check). Data were collected to identify the time required to complete vendor-specific, independent, and total DQA. Independent-QA was further analyzed to determine time spent on dosimetry checks. Output collected from both methods was compared using a Wilcoxon rank sum test for 6MV, 6MeV and 10FFF, and center shift was compared for 6MV.
Results: Total time for DQA averaged 32 minutes (21-62 min, σ=7 min), vendor-specific tests averaged 11 minutes (7-45 min, σ=7 min) and included geometry checks on isocenter, collimator, gantry and couch; output & uniformity for 2-3 photon and 2-3 electron energies; and center shift for photon energies. Independent-QA averaged 21 minutes (13-39 min, σ=5 min). Six minutes (4-12 min, σ=1 min) was spent on dosimetry checks, which included output, symmetry, flatness, energy, field size and center shift for 4 photon and 4 electron energies. The remainder was spent on imaging and mechanical/safety checks. Differences in measured output did not reach significance for any beam (p=0.288, 6MV; 0.704, 6MeV; 0.197, 10FFF), while center shift results showed a significant difference (p<0.001)
Conclusion: This work indicates that vendor-dependent and an independent-QA platform obtain similar output results, but beam center-shifts are dependent on the platform. Additionally, the independent QA platform can obtain dosimetry results more efficiently and can provide a more user-friendly interface for complete DQA data collection.
Taxonomy:TH- External Beam- Photons: Quality Assurance - Linear accelerator
By clicking “Accept Terms & all Cookies” or by continuing to browse, you agree to the storing of third-party cookies on your device to enhance your user experience and agree to the user terms and conditions of this learning management system (LMS). USER TERMS AND CONDITIONS | PRIVACY POLICY
Cookie Settings Accept Terms & all Cookies
Anonymous User Privacy Preferences
Strictly Necessary Cookies (Always Active)
MULTILEARNING platforms and tools hereinafter referred as “MLG SOFTWARE” are provided to you as pure educational platforms/services requiring cookies to operate. In the case of the MLG SOFTWARE, cookies are essential for the Platform to function properly for the provision of education. If these cookies are disabled, a large subset of the functionality provided by the Platform will either be unavailable or cease to work as expected. The MLG SOFTWARE do not capture non-essential activities such as menu items and listings you click on or pages viewed.
Performance Cookies
Performance cookies are used to analyse how visitors use a website in order to provide a better user experience.