Has anyone had success with a higher kVp/lower mAs setup to cut motion blur and staff exposure on lively patients? We’re trialing 72 kVp at 2.5 mAs, tight four-sided collimation, 100 cm SID on a Canon DR, and 0.5 mm Pb PPE with no manual restraint, and I’m curious how your image quality holds up and what your dosimeters show.
But quick example: we treated staff hazing as a certification — track ‘pass rate’ and do spot checks — and synced the script with the March 12 workshops. We also logged time-to-first-response and a simple ‘aversion achieved?’ flag per incident; those predicted complaint drops better than raw call counts; see Project Coyote’s checklist: https://www.projectcoyote.org/community-coexistence/. Small caveat: attractant enforcement only moved the needle once repeat offenders got escalated after two warnings.
We’ve had good luck going a bit higher: about 80 kVp at 1.6–2 mAs, tight collimation, 100 cm SID, gridless with Canon’s “scatter correction/virtual grid” on to hold contrast… Adding 0.1 mm Cu (plus inherent Al) clipped skin dose and scatter, and we still land near DI 0 with less motion blur — like putting sunglasses on the beam. Caveat: once chest thickness passes about 18–20 cm we either nudge mAs or pop in an 8:1 grid; what DI and patient sizes are you seeing at 72/2.5?
At 80 kVp + 0.1 mm Cu, motion blur beat your ‘72/2.5’; scatter and dosimeter readings dropped, @chloe_c88.
Quick tip: on Canon DR we nudged SID from your 100 cm to about 110 and switched to the chest detail preset, paired with slightly higher energy and lower mAs, which trimmed motion blur while keeping ‘no manual restraint’ workable. Small caveat: if the chest is under about 15 cm, ditch the grid — grid cutoff and chasing EI drives me nuts, and our badges dipped once we went gridless. What EI/DI are you landing at with that trial protocol?