Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the challenges in comparing digital radiography (DR) systems from different vendors for various combinations of exposure factors in posterior–anterior hand radiographs. Image quality was evaluated for a range of tube voltages and tube current-time products using a technical contrast-detail (CDRAD) phantom and an anthropomorphic hand phantom. 900 technical CDRAD images were analysed providing quality figures of merit (IQFinv) and two experienced reporting radiographers using visual grading analysis (VGA) scored 108 anthropomorphic images. This study demonstrates the differences between the DR systems included. When compensating for variations in dose, Canon showed superior results for technical image quality and Fuji for visual image quality for a standard dose point at DR hand examination (ln(DAP) 1.1, 50 kV and 2.5 mAs).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
