Journal of Medical Physics
 Home | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscription | Login  The official journal of AMPI, IOMP and AFOMP      
 Users online: 676  Home  EMail this page Print this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size 
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 46  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 162-170

Implementation and challenges of international atomic energy agency/american association of physicists in medicine trs 483 formalism for field output factors and involved uncertainties determination in small fields for tomotherapy

1 Department of Medical Physics, Tata Memorial Centre, Parel, Mumbai; Homi Bhabha National Institute, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Radiation Oncology, Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer, Tata Memorial Centre Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
3 Department of Medical Physics, Tata Memorial Centre, Parel, Mumbai, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Rajesh Kinhikar
Department of Medical Physics, Tata Memorial Centre, Dr. E. Borges Marg, Parel, Mumbai - 400 012, Maharashtra
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_11_21

Rights and Permissions

Purpose International Atomic Energy Agency published TRS-483 to address the issues of small field dosimetry. Our study calculates the output factor in the small fields of TomoTherapy using different detectors and dosimetric conditions. Furthermore, it estimates the various components of uncertainty and presents challenges faced during implementation. Materials and Methods Beam quality TPR20,10(10) at the hypothetical field size of 10 cm × 10 cm was calculated from TPR20,10(S). Two ionization chambers based on the minimum field width required to satisfy the lateral charge particle equilibrium and one unshielded electron field diode (EFD) were selected. Output factor measurements were performed in various dosimetric conditions. Results Beam quality TPR20,10(10) has a mean value of 0.627 ± 0.001. The maximum variation of output factor between CC01 chamber and EFD diode at the smallest field size was 11.80%. In source to surface setup, the difference between water and virtual water was up to 9.68% and 8.13%, respectively, for the CC01 chamber and EFD diode. The total uncertainty in the ionization chamber was 2.43 times higher compared to the unshielded EFD diode at the smallest field size. Conclusions Beam quality measurements, chamber selection procedure, and output factors were successfully carried out. A difference of up to 10% in output factor can occur if density scaling for electron density in virtual water is not considered. The uncertainty in output correction factors dominates, while positional and meter reading uncertainty makes a minor contribution to total uncertainty. An unshielded EFD diode is a preferred detector in small fields because of lower uncertainty in measurements compared to ionization chambers.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded113    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal