Comparison in Reading Stability between Calibrated and Non-Calibrated Ionization Chamber

Rana Kutbi, Waleed Saib, Ahdab Alahmadi, Mai Jezani

Abstract: Radiation equipment used in medical facilities requires regular calibration to ensure accurate and safe measurements. This research examines the reading stability between calibrated and non - calibrated ionization chambers, focusing on the importance of calibration in maintaining accuracy and safety. The study analyzed five ionization chambers of the same type, comparing their performance on different calibration dates. International bodies recommend calibrating ionization chambers every two to three years. However, some countries lack specific regulations for calibration. This research aims to provide insights into the impact of regular calibration on equipment performance. Implementing effective quality control programs can minimize risks associated with ionizing radiation exposure during medical procedures. The methodology involved assessing the accuracy of tube voltage and time settings, mAs linearity, and reproducibility. The half - value layer (HVL) was also measured to compare different dosimeters reading for X - ray machines. The findings of this research can guide healthcare facilities in developing comprehensive quality control programs, ensuring accurate and safe radiation equipment performance. Regular calibration is essential in maintaining measurement accuracy and minimizing risks during medical procedures. This research found that it is not necessary to calibrate the radiation measurement device annually; comparing it to a calibrated device that functions well is sufficient. However, periodic calibration, if feasible, is preferable. In many countries, including Saudi Arabia, devices are calibrated at the manufacturing country, taking one to two months. In such cases, comparing to a calibrated device may be satisfactory.

Keywords: dosimeters, medical physics, quality control, calibration