Yes / Within medical imaging variations in patient size can generate challenges, especially when selecting appropriate acquisition parameters. This experiment sought to evaluate the impact of increasing body part thickness on image quality (IQ) and effective dose (E) and identify optimum exposure parameters. Methods: An anthropomorphic pelvis phantom was imaged with additional layers (1e15 cm) of animal fat as a proxy for increasing body thickness. Acquisitions used the automatic exposure control (AEC), 100 cm source to image distance (SID) and a range of tube potentials (70e110 kVp). IQ was evaluated physically and perceptually. E was estimated using PCXMC software. Results: For all tube potentials, signal to noise ratio (SNR) and contrast to noise ratio (CNR) deceased as body part thickness increased. 70 kVp produced the highest SNR (46.6e22.6); CNR (42.8e17.6). Visual grading showed that the highest IQ scores were achieved using 70 and 75 kVp. As thickness increases, E increased exponentially (r ¼ 0.96; p < 0.001). Correlations were found between visual and physical IQ (SNR r ¼ 0.97, p < 0.001; CNR r ¼ 0.98, p < 0.001). Conclusion: To achieve an optimal IQ across the range of thicknesses, lower kVp settings were most effective. This is at variance with professional practice as there is a tendency for radiographers to increase kVp as thickness increases. Dose reductions were experienced at higher kVp settings and are a valid method for optimisation when imaging larger patients. / Hashemite University in Jordan, College of Radiographers Industry Partnership (CoRIPS)

Yes / Pelvic radiography is used for the identification of hip joint changes, including pathologies such as osteoarthritis. Several studies have recommended that the position for this radiological procedure should be standing, not supine, to reflect the functional appearances of the hip joint. The aim of this review was to evaluate pelvis radiography positioning with respect to the image appearances and information provided for clinical decision-making. Aside from this, potential recommendations to the radiographic technique for an erect pelvis projection will be considered. Method: A literature search was performed using databases/ systems (ScienceDirect, Web of Science, PubMed, and MEDLINE). Only articles written in English were included. Results: Twenty-five articles were identified. Findings from the review describe the effect of repositioning from supine to erect on a series of specific hip measurements. These include pelvic tilt, joint space width, and the acetabular component. Conclusion: Evidence within the literature illustrates that in several studies, there were differences when repositioning from supine to standing for a number of pelvic metrics. Standing positioning is promoted by some authors since this may facilitate the early diagnosis of hip joint pathology and assist in the planning of surgical interventions. Literature is very limited on how to optimally perform erect pelvis radiography, and this should be an area for future research.