Diagnostic Radiology Physics —
Training activity: 3

Details

Perform equipment performance testing under supervision on general x-ray equipment, and analyse and report results to clinical users.

Type

Developmental training activity (DTA)

Evidence requirements

Evidence the activity has been undertaken by the trainee​.

Reflection on the activity at one or more time points after the event including learning from the activity and/or areas of the trainees practice for development.

An action plan to implement learning and/or to address skills or knowledge gaps identified.

Reflective practice guidance

The guidance below is provided to support reflection at different time points, providing you with questions to aid you to reflect for this training activity. They are provided for guidance and should not be considered as a mandatory checklist. Trainees should not be expected to provide answers to each of the guidance questions listed.

Before action

What are the intended outcomes of the training activity?

• How will reviewing the relevant learning outcomes help you focus on the technical requirements for testing general x-ray equipment?
• What do you need to know about the principles of projection radiography, including the geometry of imaging and the operation of digital or computed radiography receptors, before you begin?
• In what ways will this activity help you develop the practical skills to analyse test results against established national and local tolerances?
• How will this training prepare you to communicate technical findings effectively to clinical users, such as radiographers or radiologists?
• How will you ensure you can identify common image artefacts and formulate justifiable recommendations for their rectification?

What do you anticipate you will learn from the experience?

• What specific insights do you hope to gain regarding the performance of tube, generator, and image quality tests on a general x-ray unit?
• What do you already know about the potential failure modes of general x-ray equipment and the impact these have on patient dose and image quality?
• How do you anticipate this experience will improve your ability to distinguish between equipment-related artefacts and those caused by acquisition parameters or patient factors?
• In what ways will this activity help you master the use of specialised QA equipment and software required for performance testing?
• How will this experience relate to the high-level analytical and reporting responsibilities required for your future role as a Clinical Scientist?

What actions will you take in preparation for the experience?

• How will you discuss the level of supervision and the specific range of performance tests with your Training Officer to ensure you understand the expected standards?
• Which national recommendations, local protocols, and work instructions for general x-ray QA will you review to support your analytical accuracy?
• What educational resources or image libraries will you study to familiarise yourself with the appearance of common artefacts like motion or grid cut-off?
• What potential challenges have you identified—such as troubleshooting unexpected test fails or reconciling conflicting data—and how do you plan to handle them?
• How do you honestly feel about performing these technical procedures under supervision, and how might these feelings influence your focus on technical precision?

In action

What are you doing?

• Which specific equipment performance tests—such as tube, generator, or image quality tests—are you currently conducting on the general x-ray unit, and what is your rationale for performing them in this specific order?
• How are you utilising the measurement devices and ensuring their correct operation to maintain technical precision throughout the quality assurance (QA) process?
• What decisions are you making regarding data collection and real-time analysis to ensure you are meeting the requirements of the training activity?
• Which aspects of the performance testing feel intuitive based on your current knowledge of projection radiography, and which require more conscious attention to local work instructions or national protocols?
• As you review test images, what specific visual cues are you using to identify potential image artefacts, and how are you systematically applying your knowledge of image formation to determine their cause?

How are you progressing with the activity?

• Are the performance tests proceeding as expected, or are you encountering unexpected readings or equipment flags that require immediate investigation?
• How effective is your current approach in identifying technical issues that might require a recommendation for rectification to improve image quality?
• What challenges are you facing in interpreting your findings against expected tolerances, particularly regarding digital or computed radiography receptors?
• What are you learning about the practicalities of QA on general x-ray equipment as the situation unfolds, and how does this connect to your existing knowledge of x-ray imaging technology?
• How effectively are you linking captured data parameters—such as spatial resolution or noise—to the clinical requirements of the imaging task?

How are you adapting to the situation?

• Based on your immediate observations of the data, are there alternative testing methods or additional measurements you should consider to resolve an ambiguous result?
• What support or guidance do you find yourself needing from your supervisor in this moment regarding the interpretation of complex test results or image quality parameters?
• How are you adapting your approach to ensure that your eventual report to clinical users will be clear, actionable, and address their clinical needs?
• Are you certain that your real-time decisions and technical adjustments remain strictly within your defined scope of practice?
• If an artefact is identified, how are you ensuring your proposed recommendations for rectification are practical and achievable within the current clinical environment?

On action

What did you notice?

• How would you summarise the key procedural elements and steps you took to perform equipment performance testing (such as tube, generator, and image quality tests) on the general x-ray unit?
• What specific performance parameters—such as spatial resolution, noise, or contrast—did you focus on while assessing the digital or computed radiography receptors?
• What were the results of the tests, and were they within acceptable limits according to local work instructions and national standards?
• When identifying common image artefacts, what specific features did you notice, and how did you determine if they were caused by equipment failure, acquisition parameters, or patient factors?
• What did you notice about the way you communicated technical findings and reporting results to clinical users, such as radiographers or radiologists?
• In what ways did the supervised nature of this activity influence your technical approach and your confidence in interpreting the data?

What did you learn from the activity?

• What new knowledge did you develop regarding performing and appraising quality assurance and identifying artefacts and recommending rectification?
• How has this experience improved your understanding of the principles of projection radiography and the specific QA procedures required for general x-ray equipment?
• What did you learn about the practical limitations of the equipment or measurement devices while performing these tests under supervision?
• In what ways did your reflection-in-action—the decisions you made as the testing and analysis unfolded—influence the accuracy of your final report?
• How does the ability to perform precise technical assessments and provide justifiable recommendations for rectification relate to the high-level responsibilities of your future role as a Clinical Scientist?

What will you take from the experience moving forward?

• What specific areas for continued development have you identified in your ability to analyse complex image quality parameters or troubleshoot equipment fails?
• How can you apply the learning from this activity to your routine practice, particularly when tasked with investigating suspected equipment-related artefacts?
• What specific ‘next steps’ will you now take—such as reviewing national recommendations for tolerances or studying a wider library of artefacts—to support the assimilation of what you have learned?
• What support or resources, such as specialist mentoring or access to advanced image processing software, would be beneficial for your ongoing development in this area?
• How has your learning from this activity directly supported your preparation for observed assessments, such as the DOPS for ‘Perform tube and generator tests for a general x-ray unit’ or the OCE for ‘Identify artefacts in an image and discuss how to rectify’?

Beyond action

Have you revisited the experiences?

• How has your understanding of performing and appraising quality assurance) and identifying artefacts evolved since you first engaged in supervised testing on general x-ray equipment?
• When revisiting your initial reports, how do your current skills in analysing tube and generator results compare to your experience during this supervised activity?
• Have you revisited your findings regarding image quality parameters—such as spatial resolution and noise—in light of new knowledge or updated national recommendations?
• Has your perspective on the information needs of clinical users changed over time as you have engaged in subsequent reporting interactions across different modalities?
• How has professional storytelling with peers or senior colleagues regarding challenging equipment failures or ‘near-miss’ artefacts changed your view of the diagnostic significance of QA testing?

How have these experiences impacted upon your current practice?

• How has this hands-on experience influenced your ability to critically appraise QA results or identify potential equipment issues independently in your routine practice?
• In what ways have the reporting skills you developed during this activity—specifically communicating technical results to non-technical users—been transferable to other situations, such as presenting audit data?
• How has your understanding of the differences in QA procedures across various modalities (e.g., comparing general x-ray to CT or Fluoroscopy) informed your current approach to ensuring equipment safety?
• How did the learning from this activity directly support your preparation for observed assessments, such as the Direct Observation of Practical Skills (DOPS): ‘Perform tube and generator tests for a general x-ray unit’?
• How has your ability to identify and rectify artefacts improved your daily troubleshooting of image quality issues across the department?

How might these experiences contribute towards your future practice?

• Which transferable skills developed through this activity—such as technical competence, data analysis, and professional communication—will be most essential for your future independent practice as a Clinical Scientist?
• How will your ability to identify image artefacts and problem-solve contribute to maintaining high-quality imaging and patient safety in your future role?
• What clear actions for continued development have you identified to further enhance your expertise in commissioning and QA across all diagnostic radiology modalities?
• How has the mastery of these fundamental technical tasks provided the building blocks for the high-level analytical and interpretive responsibilities you will hold in post-programme professional practice?
• What support or resources, such as specialist mentoring or access to advanced image processing tools, will you seek to continue your professional progression in diagnostic radiology physics?

Relevant learning outcomes

#	Outcome
# 2	Outcome Perform and appraise quality assurance on equipment across a range of diagnostic radiology modalities.
# 3	Outcome Identify common image artefacts and make recommendations for rectification.