• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.13-20
• /
• 1999

This study is to calculate the exposed radiation dose using Bit method, NDD calculation method and monogram method without dosimeter. In addition, we can calculate the radiation dose from x-ray film density as a film badge. The authors examined the entrance skin dose from $2{\sim}3$ intercostal chest x-ray film density. We also studied the relationship between film density and equivalent dose in the each screen film system under the different radiation quality and the poor geometry condition of grid ratio. As results, we established the deductive method to define the entrance skindose from chest x-ray film density. The error range was found in the range $-13%{\sim}+l7%$ for between deductive entrance skindose and the $2{\sim}3$ intercostal chest x-ray film density to actual detective radiation dose with dosimeter.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.34
• /
• pp.7-12
• /
• 2022

Purpose: When it is difficult to secure the skin dose when treating Irregularly Shaped Skin Surface such as the nose where it is difficult to apply a bolus, increase the skin dose with a treatment plan that combines the IMRT (Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy) delivery technique and FFF (Flattening Filter Free), It was tried to find out whether or not through the phantom experiment. Materials & Methods: Based on the 6MV-FF (Flattening Filter) and VMAT (Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy) treatment plans, which are the most commonly used treatment plans for head and neck cancer, A comparison group was created by combining VMAT and IMRT, FF and FFF, and the presence or absence of 5 mm bolus application. A virtual target was created on the Rando Phantom's nose, and a virtual bolus of 5 mm was applied assuming full contact on the Rando Phantom's nose. Five measurement points were determined based on the phantom's nose, and the absorbed dose was measured by irradiating each treatment plan 3 times per treatment plan according to the treatment technique and whether or not the bolus was applied. Result: The difference in skin dose in FF vs FFF increased in the case of FFF in VMAT bolus off, and there was no difference in case of IMRT bolus off. In VMAT bolus 5 mm and IMRT bolus 5 mm, it was confirmed that the skin dose was rather decreased in FFF. The difference in skin dose between VMAT and IMRT increased only in the case of FFF bolus off, and there was no statistical difference in the rest. For the difference in skin dose between bolus off vs bolus 5 mm, it was confirmed that the skin dose increased at bolus 5 mm, except for the case of using IMRT FFF. The treatment plan combining IMRT and FFF did not find any statistically significant difference as a result of analyzing the measured values of the treatment plan skin dose applied with a 5 mm bolus using the commonly used VMAT and FF. Therefore, it is thought that by using IMRT_FFF, it is possible to deliver a skin dose similar to that of applying a 5 mm bolus to VMAT_FF, which can be useful for patients who need a high skin dose but have difficulty applying a bolus. Conclusion: For patients who find it difficult to apply bolus, an increase in skin dose can be expected with a treatment plan that properly combines IMRT and FFF compared to VMAT and FF.