Advanced

Control chart analysis of data from a multicenter monitor unit verification study.

Nordström, Fredrik LU ; Af Wetterstedt, Sacha; Johnsson, Stefan; Ceberg, Crister LU and Bäck, Sven LU (2012) In Radiotherapy and Oncology 102(3). p.364-370
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the process of monitor unit verification using control charts. Control charts is a key tool within statistical process control (SPC), through which process characteristics can be visualized, usually chronologically with statistically determined limits. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our group has developed a monitor unit verification software that has been adopted at several Swedish institutions for pre-treatment verification of radiotherapy treatments. Deviations between point dose calculations using the treatment planning systems and using the independent monitor unit verification software from 9219 treatment plans and five different institutions were included in this multicenter study. The... (More)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the process of monitor unit verification using control charts. Control charts is a key tool within statistical process control (SPC), through which process characteristics can be visualized, usually chronologically with statistically determined limits. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our group has developed a monitor unit verification software that has been adopted at several Swedish institutions for pre-treatment verification of radiotherapy treatments. Deviations between point dose calculations using the treatment planning systems and using the independent monitor unit verification software from 9219 treatment plans and five different institutions were included in this multicenter study. The process of monitor unit verification was divided into subprocesses. Each subprocess was analyzed using probability plots and control charts. RESULTS: Differences in control chart parameters for the investigated subprocesses were found between different treatment sites and different institutions, as well as between different treatment techniques. 19 of 37 subprocesses met the clinical specification (±5%), i.e. process capability index was equal to or above one. CONCLUSIONS: Control charts were found to be a useful tool for continuous analysis of data from the monitor unit verification software for patient specific quality control, as well as for comparisons between different institutions and treatment sites. The derived control chart limits were in agreement with AAPM TG114 guidelines on action levels. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Radiotherapy and Oncology
volume
102
issue
3
pages
364 - 370
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • wos:000302048900007
  • pmid:22239866
  • scopus:84857915956
ISSN
1879-0887
DOI
10.1016/j.radonc.2011.11.016
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
5394df69-34e7-4885-a9e5-b0097632577e (old id 2336472)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22239866?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2012-02-01 20:45:20
date last changed
2017-02-05 04:33:42
@article{5394df69-34e7-4885-a9e5-b0097632577e,
  abstract     = {BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the process of monitor unit verification using control charts. Control charts is a key tool within statistical process control (SPC), through which process characteristics can be visualized, usually chronologically with statistically determined limits. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our group has developed a monitor unit verification software that has been adopted at several Swedish institutions for pre-treatment verification of radiotherapy treatments. Deviations between point dose calculations using the treatment planning systems and using the independent monitor unit verification software from 9219 treatment plans and five different institutions were included in this multicenter study. The process of monitor unit verification was divided into subprocesses. Each subprocess was analyzed using probability plots and control charts. RESULTS: Differences in control chart parameters for the investigated subprocesses were found between different treatment sites and different institutions, as well as between different treatment techniques. 19 of 37 subprocesses met the clinical specification (±5%), i.e. process capability index was equal to or above one. CONCLUSIONS: Control charts were found to be a useful tool for continuous analysis of data from the monitor unit verification software for patient specific quality control, as well as for comparisons between different institutions and treatment sites. The derived control chart limits were in agreement with AAPM TG114 guidelines on action levels.},
  author       = {Nordström, Fredrik and Af Wetterstedt, Sacha and Johnsson, Stefan and Ceberg, Crister and Bäck, Sven},
  issn         = {1879-0887},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  pages        = {364--370},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {Radiotherapy and Oncology},
  title        = {Control chart analysis of data from a multicenter monitor unit verification study.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2011.11.016},
  volume       = {102},
  year         = {2012},
}