skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Taxonometric Guidance for Developing Quality Assurance

Abstract

A taxonomy is an ordered classification system. In error reduction analysis, an examination of the human failures that lead to an event often uses a taxonomy to classify the failures according to some aspect of their characteristics. These classifications provide insights into the forces that kept the persons involved from achieving their intended actions. They also can provide guidance for changing the situation to prevent failure in the future. For example, the corrective action would be different if a therapist pressed the wrong button because several buttons looked alike or they forgot which button to press. Different types of failures lead to particular types of remediation. Taxonomies can provide guidance in selecting between possible corrective actions.

Authors:
 [1];  [2]
  1. Departments of Medical Physics, Human Oncology, Biomedical Engineering, and Engineering Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI (United States), E-mail: thomadsen@humonc.wisc.edu
  2. Yuan Ze University, Taiwan (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
21124257
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics; Journal Volume: 71; Journal Issue: 1; Conference: 2007 interorganizational symposium on quality assurance of radiation therapy: Challenges of advanced technology, Dallas, TX (United States), 20-22 Feb 2007; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.099; PII: S0360-3016(07)04351-9; Copyright (c) 2008 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; CLASSIFICATION; ERRORS; FAILURES; PATIENTS; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIOTHERAPY; REMEDIAL ACTION; TAXONOMY

Citation Formats

Thomadsen, Bruce, and Lin, She-Woei. Taxonometric Guidance for Developing Quality Assurance. United States: N. p., 2008. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.099.
Thomadsen, Bruce, & Lin, She-Woei. Taxonometric Guidance for Developing Quality Assurance. United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.099.
Thomadsen, Bruce, and Lin, She-Woei. 2008. "Taxonometric Guidance for Developing Quality Assurance". United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.099.
@article{osti_21124257,
title = {Taxonometric Guidance for Developing Quality Assurance},
author = {Thomadsen, Bruce and Lin, She-Woei},
abstractNote = {A taxonomy is an ordered classification system. In error reduction analysis, an examination of the human failures that lead to an event often uses a taxonomy to classify the failures according to some aspect of their characteristics. These classifications provide insights into the forces that kept the persons involved from achieving their intended actions. They also can provide guidance for changing the situation to prevent failure in the future. For example, the corrective action would be different if a therapist pressed the wrong button because several buttons looked alike or they forgot which button to press. Different types of failures lead to particular types of remediation. Taxonomies can provide guidance in selecting between possible corrective actions.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.099},
journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
number = 1,
volume = 71,
place = {United States},
year = 2008,
month = 5
}
  • The clinical introduction of volumetric x-ray image-guided radiotherapy systems necessitates formal commissioning of the hardware and image-guided processes to be used and drafts quality assurance (QA) for both hardware and processes. Satisfying both requirements provides confidence on the system's ability to manage geometric variations in patient setup and internal organ motion. As these systems become a routine clinical modality, the authors present data from their QA program tracking the image quality performance of ten volumetric systems over a period of 3 years. These data are subsequently used to establish evidence-based tolerances for a QA program. The volumetric imaging systems usedmore » in this work combines a linear accelerator with conventional x-ray tube and an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector mounted orthogonally from the accelerator central beam axis, in a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) configuration. In the spirit of the AAPM Report No. 74, the present work presents the image quality portion of their QA program; the aspects of the QA protocol addressing imaging geometry have been presented elsewhere. Specifically, the authors are presenting data demonstrating the high linearity of CT numbers, the uniformity of axial reconstructions, and the high contrast spatial resolution of ten CBCT systems (1-2 mm) from two commercial vendors. They are also presenting data accumulated over the period of several months demonstrating the long-term stability of the flat-panel detector and of the distances measured on reconstructed volumetric images. Their tests demonstrate that each specific CBCT system has unique performance. In addition, scattered x rays are shown to influence the imaging performance in terms of spatial resolution, axial reconstruction uniformity, and the linearity of CT numbers.« less
  • As a result of analysis of the accident at Three Mile Island 2 (TMI-2) and experiences at several construction sites for nuclear power plants, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has concluded that certain quality assurance (QA) programmatic modifications relative to existing guidelines should be made. These modifications are directed toward upgrading and strengthening the QA function at operating nuclear power plants to improve its effectiveness in identifying and correcting operational deficiencies to protect the public health and safety. The NRC has developed upgraded guidelines in specific QA programmatic areas and has initiated their implementation at TMI-1 (restart) and atmore » several other operating plants located near densely populated areas. Plans are to implement the new guidelines at all nuclear plants under design and construction and at recently built plants as well.« less
  • The traditional prescriptive quality assurance (QA) programs that attempt to ensure the safety and reliability of traditional external beam radiation therapy are limited in their applicability to such advanced radiation therapy techniques as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, inverse treatment planning, stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy, and image-guided radiation therapy. The conventional QA paradigm, illustrated by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40 (TG-40) report, consists of developing a consensus menu of tests and device performance specifications from a generic process model that is assumed to apply to all clinical applications of the device. Themore » complexity, variation in practice patterns, and level of automation of high-technology radiotherapy renders this 'one-size-fits-all' prescriptive QA paradigm ineffective or cost prohibitive if the high-probability error pathways of all possible clinical applications of the device are to be covered. The current approaches to developing comprehensive prescriptive QA protocols can be prohibitively time consuming and cost ineffective and may sometimes fail to adequately safeguard patients. It therefore is important to evaluate more formal error mitigation and process analysis methods of industrial engineering to more optimally focus available QA resources on process components that have a significant likelihood of compromising patient safety or treatment outcomes.« less
  • In the past decade, brachytherapy has shifted from the traditional surgical paradigm to more modern three-dimensional image-based planning and delivery approaches. The role of intraoperative and multimodality image-based planning is growing. Published American Association of Physicists in Medicine, American College of Radiology, European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, and International Atomic Energy Agency quality assurance (QA) guidelines largely emphasize the QA of planning and delivery devices rather than processes. These protocols have been designed to verify compliance with major performance specifications and are not risk based. With some exceptions, complete and clinically practical guidance exists for sources, QA instrumentation,more » non-image-based planning systems, applicators, remote afterloading systems, dosimetry, and calibration. Updated guidance is needed for intraoperative imaging systems and image-based planning systems. For non-image-based brachytherapy, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group reports 56 and 59 provide reasonable guidance on procedure-specific process flow and QA. However, improved guidance is needed even for established procedures such as ultrasound-guided prostate implants. Adaptive replanning in brachytherapy faces unsolved problems similar to that of image-guided adaptive external beam radiotherapy.« less
  • The introduction of volumetric X-ray image-guided radiotherapy systems allows improved management of geometric variations in patient setup and internal organ motion. As these systems become a routine clinical modality, we propose a daily quality assurance (QA) program for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) integrated with a linear accelerator. The image-guided system used in this work combines a linear accelerator with conventional X-ray tube and an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector mounted orthogonally from the accelerator central beam axis. This article focuses on daily QA protocols germane to geometric accuracy of the CBCT systems and proposes tolerance levels on the basis of moremore » than 3 years of experience with seven CBCT systems used in our clinic. Monthly geometric calibration tests demonstrate the long-term stability of the flex movements, which are reproducible within {+-}0.5 mm (95% confidence interval). The daily QA procedure demonstrates that, for rigid phantoms, the accuracy of the image-guided process can be within 1 mm on average, with a 99% confidence interval of {+-}2 mm.« less