{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02868217054263566, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0015503875968992248, 'mean_word_length': 5.266990291262136, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
SU-F-P-04: Implementation of Dose Monitoring Software: Successes and Pitfalls.

PURPOSE
to successfully install a dose monitoring software (DMS) application to assist in CT protocol and dose management.


METHODS
Upon selecting the DMS, we began our implementation of the application. A working group composed of Medical Physics, Radiology Administration, Information Technology, and CT technologists was formed. On-site training in the application was supplied by the vendor. The decision was made to apply the process for all the CT protocols on all platforms at all facilities. Protocols were painstakingly mapped to the correct masters, and the system went 'live'.


RESULTS
We are routinely using DMS as a tool in our Clinical Performance CT QA program. It is useful in determining the effectiveness of revisions to existing protocols, and establishing performance baselines for new units. However, the implementation was not without difficulty. We identified several pitfalls and obstacles which frustrated progress. Including: Training deficiencies, Nomenclature problems, Communication, DICOM variability.


CONCLUSION
Dose monitoring software can be a potent tool for QA. However, implementation of the program can be problematic and requires planning, organization and commitment.