Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026

07:31
Characterization of Recombination Effects in a Liquid Ionization Chamber Used for the Dosimetry of a Radiosurgical Accelerator
Published on: May 9, 2014
12.2K
A case study on SSD to SAD linear acceleartor calibration transition
Sharareh Koufigar1, Eric Ford1, Yulun He1
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
|October 10, 2025
Summary
This study successfully transitioned a linear accelerator from source-to-surface (SSD) to source-to-axis (SAD) calibration without interrupting patient treatments. The process ensured accuracy and standardization across clinical sites, highlighting the importance of meticulous planning for high-risk procedures.
Area of Science:
- Medical Physics
- Radiation Oncology
- Quality Assurance
Background:
- Linear accelerator calibration is critical for accurate radiation therapy.
- Transitioning calibration conditions (e.g., source-to-surface distance [SSD] to source-to-axis distance [SAD]) is infrequent and carries significant risk.
- Standardizing calibration protocols across multiple clinical sites enhances consistency and safety.
Purpose of the Study:
- To outline a systematic approach for transitioning a linear accelerator's calibration from SSD to SAD in an active clinical setting.
- To maintain treatment accuracy and avoid interruptions to patient care during the calibration change.
- To improve standardization of calibration practices across different sites within a radiation oncology service.
Main Methods:
- A single Elekta Versa HD linear accelerator was converted from SSD to SAD calibration.
- Pre-conversion evaluation of treatment plans and post-conversion beam recommissioning in the treatment planning system (TPS).
- Output adjustment per AAPM's TG-51 protocol, manual scaling of monitor units (MUs), and rigorous quality assurance (QA) checks were performed. A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) and a professional survey were conducted.
Main Results:
- The transition was completed without any interruption to patient treatments.
- Field MU scaling ranged from 2.7% to 6.4% due to the calibration change.
- Patient-specific QA and phantom measurements confirmed machine output accuracy within 2%, with consistent gamma pass rates. FMEA identified staffing as a high-risk factor, and surveys revealed low experience with such transitions.
Conclusions:
- The successful transition from SSD to SAD calibration was achieved while maintaining treatment continuity and safety.
- Multiple verification steps, including QA and peer review, were crucial for ensuring the quality and safety of the procedure.
- This project facilitated improved standardization of calibration conditions across multiple practice sites.

