PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 16, 2026Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics0 citationsOpen Access

Exposure index in digital radiography and its dependence on acquisition parameters, anatomy, and manufacturer

View Full Paper
ITIoannis A. TsalafoutasSAShady AlKhazzamMKMohammed Hassan Kharita

Key Points

  • Investigate how various acquisition parameters, anatomy, and manufacturer differences affect the exposure index in digital radiography.
  • Images acquired using two digital radiography systems from different manufacturers.
  • Utilized aluminum attenuators and an anthropomorphic phantom.
  • Varied acquisition parameters including kVp, mAs, exposure time, and AEC settings.
  • Examined the effect on exposure index for different anatomical images.
  • Exposure index is linearly related to the incident air kerma on the detector.
  • Increasing kVp results in higher exposure index at constant incident air kerma.
  • Presence of scatter generally reduces exposure index, but exceptions exist.
  • Exposure time variations affect exposure index under automatic exposure control.
  • The most significant factors influencing exposure index are imaged anatomy and manufacturer differences.

Abstract

Abstract PURPOSE The exposure index (EI), the target exposure index (EI T ), and the deviation index (DI) have been defined in the IEC Standard 62494‐1 Ed.1 2008‐08. This study investigates the impact of certain acquisition parameters, the imaged anatomy, and the manufacturer's specificities on the EI of radiological images and how these may affect EI T setting procedure. METHODS Images were acquired using two digital radiography (DR) systems of two different manufacturers, using aluminum attenuators and an anthropomorphic phantom. Acquisition parameters like the tube potential (kVp), the tube loading (mAs), the exposure time, the automatic exposure control (AEC) system settings (sensor and dose level selection), the grid (with or without), the additional filtration, the field size, and the imaged anatomy were varied and their effect on the EI was quantified separately for each system. RESULTS EI is linearly related to the incident air kerma (IAK) on the detector as expected (by definition). For constant IAK, EI increases with increasing kVp. While EI in general is reduced in the presence of scatter, this may not always be the case. Under AEC operation, even the exposure time can make a difference. EI is strongly affected by the imaged anatomy in combination with the AEC sensor and field size selections, the examination protocol, and the manufacturer. CONCLUSIONS Many parameters affect the EI calculation apart from IAK. Among them, the most important are the imaged anatomy and the manufacturer. Since the EI calculation is a complex procedure, setting of the EI T values should be done with caution on a per‐examination and manufacturer basis, since the values that apply for one digital system are not always applicable to another. Furthermore, when EI is used as an image quality tool, a DI variation of at least ±2 should be allowed before a possibly meaningful red flag is activated.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tsalafoutas et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6969d4dc940543b977709c0ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70331
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1From the use of exposure index in quality control testing to the use of exposure index for quality control of clinical images2022 · 4 citations
  2. 2The standardized exposure index for digital radiography: an opportunity for optimization of radiation dose to the pediatric population2011 · 132 citations
  3. 3Quality Assurance: Potential Use for the Newly Described Exposure Index in Clinical Practice2010 · 5 citations
  4. 4An exposure indicator for digital radiography: AAPM Task Group 116 (Executive Summary)2009 · 155 citations
  5. 5Current state of practice regarding digital radiography exposure indicators and deviation indices: Report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 2322018 · 34 citations