4.6 Article

Evaluation of the water-equivalent characteristics of the SP34 plastic phantom for film dosimetry in a clinical linear accelerator

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 18, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293191

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study verified some confusing points about electron film dosimetry using white polystyrene suggested by international protocols. The results showed that white polystyrene has similar water-equivalent characteristics as presented in the international protocols.
In this study, some confusing points about electron film dosimetry using white polystyrene suggested by international protocols were verified using a clinical linear accelerator (LINAC). According to international protocol recommendations, ionometric measurements and film dosimetry were performed on an SP34 slab phantom at various electron energies. Scaling factor analysis using ionometric measurements yielded a depth scaling factor of 0.923 and a fluence scaling factor of 1.019 at an electron beam energy of <10 MeV (i.e., R-50 < 4.0 g/cm(2)). It was confirmed that the water-equivalent characteristics were similar because they have values similar to white polystyrene (i.e., depth scaling factor of 0.922 and fluence scaling factor of 1.019) presented in international protocols. Furthermore, percentage depth dose (PDD) curve analysis using film dosimetry showed that when the density thickness of the SP34 slab phantom was assumed to be water-equivalent, it was found to be most similar to the PDD curve measured using an ionization chamber in water as a reference medium. Therefore, we proved that the international protocol recommendation that no correction for measured depth dose is required means that no scaling factor correction for the plastic phantom is necessary. This study confirmed two confusing points that could occur while determining beam characteristics using electron film dosimetry, and it is expected to be used as basic data for future research on clinical LINACs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available