Encrypted login | home

Program Information

Experimental Investigation On the Accuracy of Plastic Scintillation Dosimeters in Small Fields

no image available
P Papaconstadopoulos

P Papaconstadopoulos1*, L Archambault2 , J Seuntjens3 , (1) McGill Montreal General Hospital, Montreal, QC, (2) CHUQ Pavillon Hotel-Dieu de Quebec, Quebec, QC, (3) McGill University, Montreal, Quebec


SU-C-304-3 (Sunday, July 12, 2015) 1:00 PM - 1:55 PM Room: 304

Purpose: To investigate the accuracy of the Exradin W1 (SI) and of an “in-house” plastic scintillation dosimeter (CHUQ PSD) in small radiation fields.

Methods: Output factor (OF) measurements with the W1 and CHUQ PSD were performed for field sizes of 0.5 x 0.5, 1 x 1 and 2 x 2 cm2. Both detectors were placed parallel to the central axis (CAX) in water. The spectrum discrimination calibration method was performed in each set-up to account for the Cerenkov (CRV) signal created in the fiber. The OFs were compared to the expected field factors in water derived using i) Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of an accurate accelerator model and ii) microLion (PTW) and D1V diode (SI) OFs. MC-derived correction factors were applied to both the microLion and D1V OFs. For the CHUQ PSD the calibration was repeated in water (// CAX), solid water (perpendicular to CAX) and under a shielded configuration. The signal was collected using a spectrometer (wavelength range = 185 - 1100 nm). Spectral analysis was performed to evaluate potential changes of the spectral distributions under the
various calibration set-up configurations.

Results: The W1 OFs presented an over-response for the 0.5 x 0.5 cm2 in the range of 3 – 4.1% relative to the expected field factor. The CHUQ PSD presented an under-response in the range of 1.5 – 2.7%, without accounting for volume averaging. The CRV spectra under the various calibration procedures appeared similar to each other and only minor changes were observed to the respective OFs.

Conclusion: The W1 and CHUQ PSD can be used in small fields down to a 1 x 1 cm2 field size. Discrepancies were encountered between the two detectors for the smallest field size of 0.5 x 0.5 cm2 with the CHUQ PSD exhibiting a closer agreement to the expected field factor.

Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: Funding sources: 1) Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation in Greece and 2) CREATE Medical Physics Research Training Network grant of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Grant number: 432290, RGPIN-2014-06475

Contact Email: