• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.161-166
• /
• 2004

A simplistic quality assurance (QA) method was designed for a Linac built-in enhanced dynamic wedge (EDW), which can be utilized to make wedged beam distributions. For the purpose of implementing the EDW symmetry QA, a film dosimetry system, low speedy dosimetry film, film densitometer and 3D RTP system were used, and the films irradiated by means of a 60$^{\circ}$ Reversed wedge pair (REWP) method. The profiles were then analyzed in terms of their symmetries, including partial treatment, which is the case of stopping it abruptly during EDW irradiation, and the measured and calculated values compared using the Cad Plan Golden Segmented Treatment Table (Golden STT). The result of this experiment was in good agreement, within 1 %, of the 'reversed wedge pair counterbalance effect'. For the QA of the effective wedge factor (EWF), the authors measured EWFs in relation to the 10$^{\circ}$, 15$^{\circ}$, 20$^{\circ}$, 25$^{\circ}$, 30$^{\circ}$, 45$^{\circ}$ and 60$^{\circ}$ EDW, which were compared with the calculated values using the correction factor derived from the Golden STT and the log files produced automatically during the process of EDW irradiation. By means of this method it was capable of check up the safety of effective wedge factor without any other dosimetry system. The EDW QA was able to be completed within 1 hour from irradiation to analysis as a consequence of the simplified QA procedure, with maximized effectiveness. Unlike the metal wedge system, the EDW system was heavily dependent on the dose rates and jaw movements; therefore, its features could potentially cause inaccuracy. The frequent simplistic QA for the EDW is essential, and could secure against the flaw of dynamic treatment that uses the EDW.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.71-78
• /
• 1997

Purpose : To collect beam data for dynamic wedge fields using conventional measurement tools without the multi-detector system, such as the linear diode detectors or ionization chambers. Materials and Methods : The accelerator CL 2100 C/D has two photon energies of 6MV and 15MV with dynamic wedge an91es of 15o, 30o, 45o and 60o. Wedge transmission factors, percentage depth doses(PDD's) and dose Profiles were measured. The measurements for wedge transmission factors are performed for field sizes ranging from $4\times4cm^2\;to\;20\times20cm^2$ in 1-2cm steps. Various rectangular field sizes are also measured for each photon energy of 6MV and 15MV, with the combination of each dynamic wedge angle of 15o 30o. 45o and 60o. These factors are compared to the calculated wedge factors using STT(Segmented Treatment Table) value. PDD's are measured with the film and the chamber in water Phantom for fixed square field. Converting parameters for film data to chamber data could be obtained from this procedure. The PDD's for dynamic wedged fields could be obtained from film dosimetry by using the converting parameters without using ionization chamber. Dose profiles are obtained from interpolation and STT weighted superposition of data through selected asymmetric static field measurement using ionization chamber. Results : The measured values of wedge transmission factors show good agreement to the calculated values The wedge factors of rectangular fields for constant V-field were equal to those of square fields The differences between open fields' PDDs and those from dynamic fields are insignificant. Dose profiles from superposition method showed acceptable range of accuracy(maximum 2% error) when we compare to those from film dosimetry. Conclusion : The results from this superposition method showed that commissionning of dynamic wedge could be done with conventional dosimetric tools such as Point detector system and film dosimetry winthin maximum 2% error range of accuracy.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.53-60
• /
• 2010

Purpose: We try to calculate EDW-factor easily with the formula applies essential data of EDW-factor and evaluate the validity through a measurement. Materials and Methods: We used the given value of GSTT (Golden Segmented Treatment Table) for the calculation of the EDW-factor. As to the experimental device, 0.6 cc farmer-type ion-chamber, an electrometer and water- phantom were used. A measurement was made at the maximum dose depth of the photon beam energy 6 MV and 15 MV under the condition that SSD (Source to Surface Distance) was 100 cm. The angle of the EDW (Enhanced Dynamic Wedge) which we use in an experiment was 60 degree, 30 degree, 20 degree in the Y1-OUT direction. We used Eclipse planning system (Varian, USA) as RTP system and the EDW-factor was calculated about all fields and EDW direction. In order to show the EDW-factor feature, a measurement was made at the selected field that verify the influence of the dependability about X, Y jaw and off-axis field. Results: When we change the Y1 field, it influence on the EDW-Factor and measured value. But the error between measured values and calculated values was less than 1%. The experimental result indicated the tendency that the error of the result of calculation and measured value becomes smaller as the EDW angle become smaller whether the calculation point (measurement point) and iso-center are same or not. The influence of the field size and energy did not show up. We simulated with the same condition using the RTP system. And we found that it makes no difference between the MU which is calculated manually by applying the EDW-Factor obtained from the commercial program and the value which is calculated by using RTP system. Conclusion: We excluded fitting value from well-known EDW-Factor formula and calculated EDW-factor with the formula applies essential data of EDW-factor only. As a result, there are no significant difference between the measured value and calculated value and it showed errors less than 1%. Also, we implemented the commercial program to calculate EDW-Factor conveniently without measure a factor on each field.