Statistical process control and process capability analysis for non‐normal volumetric modulated arc therapy patient‐specific quality assurance processes
Purpose Applying statistical process control (SPC) to intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) program was recommended by the American Association of Physics in Medicine Task Group 218 report, but a comprehensive analys...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Medical physics (Lancaster) 2020-10, Vol.47 (10), p.4694-4702 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 4702 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 4694 |
| container_title | Medical physics (Lancaster) |
| container_volume | 47 |
| creator | Xiao, Qing Bai, Sen Li, Guangjun Yang, Kaixuan Bai, Long Li, Zhibin Chen, Li Xian, Lixun Hu, Zhenyao Zhong, Renming |
| description | Purpose
Applying statistical process control (SPC) to intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) program was recommended by the American Association of Physics in Medicine Task Group 218 report, but a comprehensive analysis of PSQA processes with non‐normal distributions is lacking. This study investigates SPC and process capability analysis (PCA) methods for non‐normal IMRT/VMAT PSQA processes.
Methods
1119 VMAT PSQAs were performed on three beam‐matched linear accelerators (linacs), using gamma analysis. The Anderson–Darling statistic was used to test normality. The control charts for each PSQA process were obtained using three non‐normal‐based methods and compared with the conventional Shewhart method. The ability of each PSQA process to produce an output within the specification limit was measured using the Cpk index; in this study, the Cpk index was calculated using two transformation methods and compared with that calculated using the conventional method. The performances of the three linacs were assessed using SPC and PCA methods.
Results
All three PSQA processes were non‐normal (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/mp.14399 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2425001085</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2425001085</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3749-65e0ae715ece8be9eb4e127d47c1d8510c5e8b01eef08c2c3d39d54f7f5458883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kctu1TAQhi0EoqcFiSdAXrJJO76dJMuqKrRSK5CAdeTjTISRE6cepyg7HoEH4Ol4khpOLytWI_365vulGcbeCDgWAPJknI-FVm37jG2krlWlJbTP2Qag1ZXUYA7YIdF3ANgqAy_ZgZLbugajNuz352yzp-ydDXxO0SERd3HKKQZup_4ps7Pd-eDzWmIbVvLEh5j4FKc_P39NMY1FcBvDMmJO3vEx9kuwGXtuk-P5GyY7r3wuZTjlskEzOj8U8GaxeyvRkuzk8KES6RV7MdhA-Pp-HrGv78-_nF1UVx8_XJ6dXlVO1bqttgbBYi0MOmx22OJOo5B1r2sn-sYIcKbkIBAHaJx0qldtb_RQD0abpmnUEXu395bmmwUpd6MnhyHYCeNCndTSAAhozBPqUiRKOHRz8qNNayeg-_uLbpy7f78o6Nt767IbsX8EH45fgGoP_PAB1_-KuutPe-EdMo2ZkQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2425001085</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Statistical process control and process capability analysis for non‐normal volumetric modulated arc therapy patient‐specific quality assurance processes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Xiao, Qing ; Bai, Sen ; Li, Guangjun ; Yang, Kaixuan ; Bai, Long ; Li, Zhibin ; Chen, Li ; Xian, Lixun ; Hu, Zhenyao ; Zhong, Renming</creator><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Qing ; Bai, Sen ; Li, Guangjun ; Yang, Kaixuan ; Bai, Long ; Li, Zhibin ; Chen, Li ; Xian, Lixun ; Hu, Zhenyao ; Zhong, Renming</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
Applying statistical process control (SPC) to intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) program was recommended by the American Association of Physics in Medicine Task Group 218 report, but a comprehensive analysis of PSQA processes with non‐normal distributions is lacking. This study investigates SPC and process capability analysis (PCA) methods for non‐normal IMRT/VMAT PSQA processes.
Methods
1119 VMAT PSQAs were performed on three beam‐matched linear accelerators (linacs), using gamma analysis. The Anderson–Darling statistic was used to test normality. The control charts for each PSQA process were obtained using three non‐normal‐based methods and compared with the conventional Shewhart method. The ability of each PSQA process to produce an output within the specification limit was measured using the Cpk index; in this study, the Cpk index was calculated using two transformation methods and compared with that calculated using the conventional method. The performances of the three linacs were assessed using SPC and PCA methods.
Results
All three PSQA processes were non‐normal (P < 0.005). Compared to the non‐normal‐based SPC and PCA methods, the false alarm rates of the conventional method for linac1, linac2, and linac3 were 0.83%, 3.77%, and 4.95% respectively; the minimum overestimated Cpk values were 0.59, 0.87, and 1.49, respectively. The process capabilities of the three beam‐matched linacs were at different levels.
Conclusion
For non‐normal VMAT PSQA processes, the conventional SPC and PCA methods increase the false alarm rates and overestimate process capabilities. Instead, non‐normal‐based SPC and PCA methods are more reliable and accurate in non‐normal PSQA processes. Statistical process control and PCA are useful tools for assessing the performance of beam‐matched linacs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-2405</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2473-4209</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/mp.14399</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32677053</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>gamma passing rate ; Humans ; Particle Accelerators ; patient‐specific ; process capability analysis ; quality assurance ; Quality Assurance, Health Care ; Radiotherapy Dosage ; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted ; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated ; statistical process control ; volumetric modulated arc therapy</subject><ispartof>Medical physics (Lancaster), 2020-10, Vol.47 (10), p.4694-4702</ispartof><rights>2020 American Association of Physicists in Medicine</rights><rights>2020 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3749-65e0ae715ece8be9eb4e127d47c1d8510c5e8b01eef08c2c3d39d54f7f5458883</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3749-65e0ae715ece8be9eb4e127d47c1d8510c5e8b01eef08c2c3d39d54f7f5458883</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fmp.14399$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fmp.14399$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32677053$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Sen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Guangjun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Kaixuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Long</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Zhibin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xian, Lixun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Zhenyao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhong, Renming</creatorcontrib><title>Statistical process control and process capability analysis for non‐normal volumetric modulated arc therapy patient‐specific quality assurance processes</title><title>Medical physics (Lancaster)</title><addtitle>Med Phys</addtitle><description>Purpose
Applying statistical process control (SPC) to intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) program was recommended by the American Association of Physics in Medicine Task Group 218 report, but a comprehensive analysis of PSQA processes with non‐normal distributions is lacking. This study investigates SPC and process capability analysis (PCA) methods for non‐normal IMRT/VMAT PSQA processes.
Methods
1119 VMAT PSQAs were performed on three beam‐matched linear accelerators (linacs), using gamma analysis. The Anderson–Darling statistic was used to test normality. The control charts for each PSQA process were obtained using three non‐normal‐based methods and compared with the conventional Shewhart method. The ability of each PSQA process to produce an output within the specification limit was measured using the Cpk index; in this study, the Cpk index was calculated using two transformation methods and compared with that calculated using the conventional method. The performances of the three linacs were assessed using SPC and PCA methods.
Results
All three PSQA processes were non‐normal (P < 0.005). Compared to the non‐normal‐based SPC and PCA methods, the false alarm rates of the conventional method for linac1, linac2, and linac3 were 0.83%, 3.77%, and 4.95% respectively; the minimum overestimated Cpk values were 0.59, 0.87, and 1.49, respectively. The process capabilities of the three beam‐matched linacs were at different levels.
Conclusion
For non‐normal VMAT PSQA processes, the conventional SPC and PCA methods increase the false alarm rates and overestimate process capabilities. Instead, non‐normal‐based SPC and PCA methods are more reliable and accurate in non‐normal PSQA processes. Statistical process control and PCA are useful tools for assessing the performance of beam‐matched linacs.</description><subject>gamma passing rate</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Particle Accelerators</subject><subject>patient‐specific</subject><subject>process capability analysis</subject><subject>quality assurance</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care</subject><subject>Radiotherapy Dosage</subject><subject>Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated</subject><subject>statistical process control</subject><subject>volumetric modulated arc therapy</subject><issn>0094-2405</issn><issn>2473-4209</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kctu1TAQhi0EoqcFiSdAXrJJO76dJMuqKrRSK5CAdeTjTISRE6cepyg7HoEH4Ol4khpOLytWI_365vulGcbeCDgWAPJknI-FVm37jG2krlWlJbTP2Qag1ZXUYA7YIdF3ANgqAy_ZgZLbugajNuz352yzp-ydDXxO0SERd3HKKQZup_4ps7Pd-eDzWmIbVvLEh5j4FKc_P39NMY1FcBvDMmJO3vEx9kuwGXtuk-P5GyY7r3wuZTjlskEzOj8U8GaxeyvRkuzk8KES6RV7MdhA-Pp-HrGv78-_nF1UVx8_XJ6dXlVO1bqttgbBYi0MOmx22OJOo5B1r2sn-sYIcKbkIBAHaJx0qldtb_RQD0abpmnUEXu395bmmwUpd6MnhyHYCeNCndTSAAhozBPqUiRKOHRz8qNNayeg-_uLbpy7f78o6Nt767IbsX8EH45fgGoP_PAB1_-KuutPe-EdMo2ZkQ</recordid><startdate>202010</startdate><enddate>202010</enddate><creator>Xiao, Qing</creator><creator>Bai, Sen</creator><creator>Li, Guangjun</creator><creator>Yang, Kaixuan</creator><creator>Bai, Long</creator><creator>Li, Zhibin</creator><creator>Chen, Li</creator><creator>Xian, Lixun</creator><creator>Hu, Zhenyao</creator><creator>Zhong, Renming</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202010</creationdate><title>Statistical process control and process capability analysis for non‐normal volumetric modulated arc therapy patient‐specific quality assurance processes</title><author>Xiao, Qing ; Bai, Sen ; Li, Guangjun ; Yang, Kaixuan ; Bai, Long ; Li, Zhibin ; Chen, Li ; Xian, Lixun ; Hu, Zhenyao ; Zhong, Renming</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3749-65e0ae715ece8be9eb4e127d47c1d8510c5e8b01eef08c2c3d39d54f7f5458883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>gamma passing rate</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Particle Accelerators</topic><topic>patient‐specific</topic><topic>process capability analysis</topic><topic>quality assurance</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care</topic><topic>Radiotherapy Dosage</topic><topic>Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated</topic><topic>statistical process control</topic><topic>volumetric modulated arc therapy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Sen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Guangjun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Kaixuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Long</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Zhibin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xian, Lixun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Zhenyao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhong, Renming</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Xiao, Qing</au><au>Bai, Sen</au><au>Li, Guangjun</au><au>Yang, Kaixuan</au><au>Bai, Long</au><au>Li, Zhibin</au><au>Chen, Li</au><au>Xian, Lixun</au><au>Hu, Zhenyao</au><au>Zhong, Renming</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Statistical process control and process capability analysis for non‐normal volumetric modulated arc therapy patient‐specific quality assurance processes</atitle><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle><addtitle>Med Phys</addtitle><date>2020-10</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>4694</spage><epage>4702</epage><pages>4694-4702</pages><issn>0094-2405</issn><eissn>2473-4209</eissn><abstract>Purpose
Applying statistical process control (SPC) to intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) program was recommended by the American Association of Physics in Medicine Task Group 218 report, but a comprehensive analysis of PSQA processes with non‐normal distributions is lacking. This study investigates SPC and process capability analysis (PCA) methods for non‐normal IMRT/VMAT PSQA processes.
Methods
1119 VMAT PSQAs were performed on three beam‐matched linear accelerators (linacs), using gamma analysis. The Anderson–Darling statistic was used to test normality. The control charts for each PSQA process were obtained using three non‐normal‐based methods and compared with the conventional Shewhart method. The ability of each PSQA process to produce an output within the specification limit was measured using the Cpk index; in this study, the Cpk index was calculated using two transformation methods and compared with that calculated using the conventional method. The performances of the three linacs were assessed using SPC and PCA methods.
Results
All three PSQA processes were non‐normal (P < 0.005). Compared to the non‐normal‐based SPC and PCA methods, the false alarm rates of the conventional method for linac1, linac2, and linac3 were 0.83%, 3.77%, and 4.95% respectively; the minimum overestimated Cpk values were 0.59, 0.87, and 1.49, respectively. The process capabilities of the three beam‐matched linacs were at different levels.
Conclusion
For non‐normal VMAT PSQA processes, the conventional SPC and PCA methods increase the false alarm rates and overestimate process capabilities. Instead, non‐normal‐based SPC and PCA methods are more reliable and accurate in non‐normal PSQA processes. Statistical process control and PCA are useful tools for assessing the performance of beam‐matched linacs.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>32677053</pmid><doi>10.1002/mp.14399</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0094-2405 |
| ispartof | Medical physics (Lancaster), 2020-10, Vol.47 (10), p.4694-4702 |
| issn | 0094-2405 2473-4209 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2425001085 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | gamma passing rate Humans Particle Accelerators patient‐specific process capability analysis quality assurance Quality Assurance, Health Care Radiotherapy Dosage Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated statistical process control volumetric modulated arc therapy |
| title | Statistical process control and process capability analysis for non‐normal volumetric modulated arc therapy patient‐specific quality assurance processes |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T12%3A11%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Statistical%20process%20control%20and%20process%20capability%20analysis%20for%20non%E2%80%90normal%20volumetric%20modulated%20arc%20therapy%20patient%E2%80%90specific%20quality%20assurance%20processes&rft.jtitle=Medical%20physics%20(Lancaster)&rft.au=Xiao,%20Qing&rft.date=2020-10&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=4694&rft.epage=4702&rft.pages=4694-4702&rft.issn=0094-2405&rft.eissn=2473-4209&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/mp.14399&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2425001085%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2425001085&rft_id=info:pmid/32677053&rfr_iscdi=true |