Skip Navigation

Journal of the ICRU 2009 9(1):33-35; doi:10.1093/jicru/ndp007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements 2009

4. Concepts of Quality Assurance and Standardization

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

4.1 Introduction

A variety of bone densitometry approaches using different modalities and techniques have been validated as suited for the assessment of osteoporosis. However, to be useful in clinical practice, it is necessary to assess whether the local equipment works adequately and whether the results of different densitometric devices implementing the same technique are comparable. In order to verify that pre-specified performance standards are met, a variety of quality assurance measures must be implemented. These demand standardization, calibration, and longitudinal instrument control. To improve on these aspects was a major motivation to initiate the present Report as pointed out in the introduction.

Standardization aims at trueness and inter-device comparability to homogenize manufacturer-dependent implementations. Issues in QUS, DXA, and QCT . . . [Full Text of this Article]

4.2 Standardization

4.3 Calibration

4.4 Longitudinal Instrument Control

4.5 Other Quality Assurance Measures


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?