Quantitative Look Into Ultrasound Quality Assurance
Presentations
PO-GePV-P-19 (Sunday, 7/10/2022) [Eastern Time (GMT-4)]
ePoster Forums
Purpose: Since Ultrasound QA is for the most part a subjective and qualitative process, the goal is to add more quantitative measurements that provide an outline on how to improve image quality and clarity through these tests and to find any weaknesses in prior testing.
Methods: Using a Multi-Purpose Multi-Tissue CIRS ultrasound phantom and GE PACS to collect and analyze images. All the tests are done using the low attenuation side of the phantom for uniformity. The tests to be done are axial and lateral resolution at all depths visible, overall depth of penetration, contrast to noise ratio at the 6 cm depth or 5 cm depth for transducers with low depth of penetration, system sensitivity, and geometric accuracy of a 5 cm distance, or 4 cm distance for transducers with poor penetration depth.
Results: Focusing on a 5C1 transducer, all tested transducers had same depth of penetration with 16 cm and a geometric accuracy of 4.98 cm. The average system sensitivity was a ROI with a value of 242. The axial resolution averages were .875 mm, 1.5 mm and 3.25 mm for the near field, focal zone and far field respectively. For lateral resolution, the averages were 1.75 mm, 2.25 mm and 4.25 mm for the near field, focal zone and far field respectively. The contrast to noise ratio ranged from 6.61-9.78 with an average of 8.165.
Conclusion: Since this is preliminary stages of quantitative testing, this gives a good baseline on what to fix and what can be expected in the future for possible results. A more robust testing guide to be built up can give more insight to the possible values that we are receiving as well as building out tests for different modes within the machines.
Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: Rush University Medical Center
Keywords
Quality Assurance, Quality Control, Contrast
Taxonomy
IM- Ultrasound : Quality Control and Image Quality Assessment
Contact Email