[P007] Patient dose management systems. Our experience in the CT department

Purpose Computed Tomography (CT) scanners are equipped with a vast variety of different technology and protocols. Due to the extended range of technical parameters (kV, mA, rotation time, pitch, filters, reconstruction algorithms, etc.), radiation dose varies significantly between patients. Depending on clinical needs and patient body habitus, patient radiation dose differs, even for the same anatomical region, clinical indication, technical protocol and even for the same CT. Thus, the need to monitor, optimize and generally review medical practices in CT has risen immensely. Manually dealing with these demanding tasks can be extremely time consuming. Nowadays, sophisticated patient dose management software (PDMS) with user-friendly interface can assist to this task, resulting in an easier and quicker way to monitor and analyse data. Our study focused on getting a general overview of the software capabilities, investigating potential difficulties or practical issues during use, evaluating staff performance in the daily routine and examining if and how the PDMS could assist in a more efficient management of the department. Materials and methods A commercially available PDMS (DOSE by Qaelum, Leuven, Belgium) was recently installed in our CT department. The software was connected to our 64-slice CT scanner. More than 6000 CT examinations were analysed. Volumetric Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDIvol), Dose Length Product (DLP) and Effective Dose (E) were evaluated for chest, abdomen and chest-abdomen-pelvis exams. Organ doses estimated, by the software, were also evaluated. Results The software provided easy, quick statistical overview of clinical/technical data. Typical local doses were comparable to national/international data. Organ doses estimated proved to be a valuable tool in individualized patient dosimetry. It also provided the time periods the scanner was not in use and facilitated easy scheduling of routine quality control tests and other routine tasks. A number of errors were identified and communicated to the staff; corrective actions were taken. Conclusions The PDMS proved to be a highly sophisticated system and a valuable tool for managing the radiology department. It provided advanced analysis that could assist for an in-depth evaluation in terms of patient dosimetry, staff performance and usage of equipment.