[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Kodak X-ray film lowers radiation dose
Radsafers - Not to sound like a commercial, but wanted to clarify some
points recently made on Radsafe about film vs digital in the health care
world. Kodak's Health Imaging Group offers a full range of imaging
solutions for radiologists. The traditional medical films are still used
by a significant number of radiologists in both developed and emerging
markets. As demonstrated by our announcement of the high speed film, we
continue to invest in selected technologies.
Kodak has been offering digital solutions to radiologists for several
years. Our digital X-ray equipment has been installed in numerous
hospitals, clinics, and health care facilities worldwide. Using Kodak
Health Imaging products, some hospitals are filmless. Following are some
of our digital offerings>
Digitizers that will convert traditional films to digital images.
For modalities, such as MRI, the images can be managed by Kodak's Picture
Archive and Communication Systems (PACS). These digital images can be read
on Kodak's displays or printed on our laser imagers for viewing on a
conventional viewbox.
Kodak sells both Computed and Digital Radiography equipment. Computed
Radiography (CR) uses a storage phosphor, instead of a film/screen
combination, in the cassette to capture the image. The stored image in the
phosphor is read by a laser and the image is printed to a laser film or
read on soft copy. The storage phosphor image is erased and available for
the next exam. CR systems can use existing X-ray generators. Digital
Radiography (DR) replaces the cassette with an array that converts the
X-radiation to a digital image. These systems are sold with a X-ray
generator.
Kodak also offers digital capture solutions for both intraoral and
extraoral dental applications.
Following is the web site for Health Imaging with more information on
Kodak's digital offerings in the medical field:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/health/
Not sure about the issue of digital medical images used as evidence in the
court of law. I'm sure the lawyers will let us know.
_____________________________
Joseph M. Greco, CHP
Radiation/Laser Safety Officer
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester NY 14652-6261
voice: 585-588-3324
fax: 585-588-0825
email: joseph.greco@kodak.com
motto: "illegitimi non carborundum"
Russ Johnson
<rujohnso@nmsu.edu> To: "Vernig, Peter G." <Peter.Vernig@MED.VA.GOV>
Sent by: cc: "radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu"
owner-radsafe@list.van <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
derbilt.edu Subject: Re: Kodak X-ray film lowers radiation dose
08/05/2004 03:09 PM
Please respond to Russ
Johnson
Filmless photography is the rage now, so why not filmless medical
radiography? Kodak had better prepare or they will become obsolete. Our
local hospital went with digital imaging a couple of years ago. Works fine.
Only thing to keep in mind is that digital radiographic images might not be
admissible as evidence in a court of law. I don't know if that one has come
up yet or not. So, film will likely be around for a while longer, just for
things like that.
-Russ
"Vernig, Peter G." wrote:
Film is passé and will probably soon be all but obsolete in this
country. Digital imaging is here now and we switched over a year ago
in radiology. One of our clinics uses it in their dental clinic we
do not as yet, matter of inertia and start up costs. But besides
reducing use of chemicals with toxic silver [that's right silver] and
attendant silver recovery it allows us to read studies from two of
our clinics here.My guess is Kodak is trying to retain as much
business for as long as possible by making whatever improvements it
can.I visited an orthopedist because my daughter had a problem
[essentially like having osteoporosis [sp?] in one bone in her foot
because of poor blood supply. The doctor was able to zoom, enlarge,
rotate, and very visually and explicitly show me the problem, or
actually the correction of the problem.It was way cool! And my
daughter's foot is OK too. Any opinions in this e-mail are solely
those of the author, and are not represented as those of the VA
Eastern Colorado HCS, the Dept. of Veterans Affairs, or the US
Government.
Peter G. Vernig, Radiation Safety Officer, VA Eastern Colorado Health
Care System, 1055 Clermont St. Denver, CO 80220,
peter.vernig@med.va.gov, Phone= 303.399.8020 x2447; Fax =
303.393.5026, alternate fax, 303.393.5248
"...whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is lovely, whatever
is admirable, if anything is found to be excellent or praiseworthy,
let your mind dwell on these things."
Paul of Tarsus
-----Original Message-----
From: JGinniver@AOL.COM [mailto:JGinniver@AOL.COM]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 9:33 AM
To: jim_hoerner@HOTMAIL.COM; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Kodak X-ray film lowers radiation dose
In a message dated 4/8/04 3:25:34 am, jim_hoerner@HOTMAIL.COM
writes:
[Makes one wonder if it's more expensive film, and if so, is
it worth it?
LNT in action, folks.
I don't know whether there will be some increase in price for
this new film, but I have got the dentist who undertakes work
at our site to move from group D to Group E films which reduces
the dose by about half. I did check with his film supplier and
the cost was the same. In addition I checked with Kodak and
the Group E film used the same processing as the Group D and
so there was no additional cost for new equipment, writing new
procedures, staff training etc.
A true example of ALARA, where it was entirely reasonable to
reduce doses by half.
Regards,
Julian