Fwd: Non-invasive QA meters

[Ccja@aol.com]

---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:	clandis@RIKER.NEOUCOM.EDU (Carl F. Landis)
Sender:	medphys@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU (Medical Physics Listserver)
Reply-to:	MEDPHYS@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU (Medical Physics Mailing List)
To:	MEDPHYS@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU (Multiple recipients of list MEDPHYS)
Date: 97-09-15 10:30:13 EDT

>
> Dear All
>
> We are intending to purchase a diagnostic QA meter (kVp, time, dose)
> hopefully (!) suitable for general xray, fluoro, mammography, dental
> (including OPG) and CT.  Responses I have seen in the past appear to
> advocate the Keithley Triad system, however much hype appeared at the
> time Nero mAx was released.  We are conscious that many meters measure
> fluoro kVp with difficulty.
>
> Would any users of the Triad or Nero mAx (or both) care to respond to
> some questions?
>
> 1. Is the Triad versatile enough to cover all modalities?  In what
> situations are reliable measurements difficult (e.g. fluoro kVp)?

I feel that Triad is much more versitile than Nero.  I have found field
service reps reporting large differences in fluoro or radiographic
exposures compared to my measurements, theirs always being lower, because
they were not trained as to what part of the detector to include in their
fied.  They were coning down to the kvp filters which does not include the
entire ion chamber.  I also find the Nero bulky and awkward to use.  And
the Triad gives me more control over what is being measured.

>
> 2. Is the Nero mAx as good as the hype?  Does it have any problems?

Cannot answer this.

> 3. Any comments from users of both which is preferable?
>
See above.


*****************************************************************************
Carl F. Landis, II                      clandis@neoucom.edu
Associate Medical Physicist
Southside Medical Center                330-740-4409
345 Oak Hill Ave.                       FAX: 330-740-6581
Youngstown, OH  44501-0990
****************************************************************************