Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

A quality assurance program for the on-board imagers.

Sua Yoo1, Gwe-Ya Kim, Rabih Hammoud

  • 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA. sua.yoo@duke.edu

Medical Physics
|December 13, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Characterization and Outcome Prediction of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)·2026
Same author

Domain-Specific Cognition-Sparing Stereotactic Radiosurgery: A Novel Planning Approach for Functional Preservation.

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics·2026
Same author

A voxel-wise uncertainty-guided framework for glioma segmentation using spherical projection-based U-Net and localized refinement.

Medical physics·2026
Same author

PhysMorph: A biomechanical and image-guided deep learning framework for real-time multi-modal liver image registration.

Physics and imaging in radiation oncology·2026
Same author

Reinforcement learning-guided segment anything model for MRI prostate and dominant intraprostatic lesions auto-segmentation.

Physics in medicine and biology·2026
Same author

An exploratory study on integrating radiomics with vision transformers for enhancing medical imaging classification accuracy.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Correction to "On the shape of the radiation survival curve in tumor spheroids: The role of oxygen heterogeneity".

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Multi-view constrained semi-supervised vertebra detection for 3D ultrasound spine volume.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Accuracy of quantitative <sup>177</sup>Lu SPECT/CT imaging: A systematic review.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Physics-constrained dual-domain network for CBCT reconstruction from orthogonal X-rays in gynecologic radiotherapy.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Decomposition-based harmonization for quantitative PET imaging across scanners and radiotracers.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Development and evaluation of an in vivo dose-based monitoring system for electron FLASH radiation therapy.

Medical physics·2026
See all related articles

A new quality assurance (QA) program for the On-Board Imager (OBI) system ensures reliable performance. Regular QA testing of the OBI system confirms its mechanical accuracy and stable image quality over time.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Physics
  • Radiological Imaging Technology
  • Quality Assurance in Healthcare

Background:

  • The On-Board Imager (OBI) is crucial for modern radiation therapy, enabling precise patient positioning.
  • Ensuring the consistent performance and safety of OBI systems is vital for treatment accuracy and patient outcomes.
  • Existing quality assurance (QA) protocols may vary across institutions, necessitating a standardized approach.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop a comprehensive and practical QA program for the On-Board Imager (OBI) system.
  • To evaluate the performance of both radiographic and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) modes of the OBI.
  • To summarize multi-institutional QA test results over extended periods to assess system reliability.

Main Methods:

  • Combined QA programs from four institutions into a unified testing framework.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Implemented tests for safety, functionality, geometry, and image quality (radiographic and CBCT).
  • Monitored parameters including isocenter accuracy, arm position accuracy, spatial resolution, contrast sensitivity, HU linearity, and uniformity.

    • Main Results:

    • All safety and functionality tests passed daily.
    • OBI isocenter accuracy averaged <1.5 mm with <1 mm variation over 8 months.
    • Mechanical geometry QA showed accuracy <1 mm with <1 mm variation over 8 months.
    • Radiographic contrast sensitivity: 2.2–3.2%; spatial resolution: 1.25–1.6 lp/mm.
    • CBCT image quality remained stable with acceptable HU linearity (+/-40 HU).

    Conclusions:

    • A comprehensive, multi-institutional QA program for the OBI system has been successfully developed.
    • The OBI system demonstrates reliable mechanical accuracy and stable image quality over extended operational periods.
    • Regular QA testing is essential for detecting performance deficits and ensuring optimal OBI system function.