The present study is focused on the personnel doses during several types of interventional radiology procedures. Apart from the use of the official whole body dosemeters (thermoluminescence dosemeter type), measurements were performed to the extremities and the eyes using thermoluminescent loose pellets. The mean doses per kerma area product were calculated for the monitored anatomic regions and for the most frequent types of procedures. Higher dose values were measured during therapeutic procedures, especially embolisations. The maximum recorded doses during a single procedure were 1.8 mSv to the finger (nephrostomy), 2.1 mSv to the wrist (liver chemoembolisation), 0.6 mSv to the leg (brain embolisation) and 2.4 mSv to the eye (brain embolisation). The annual doses estimated for the operator with the highest workload according to the measurements and the system's log book were 90.4 mSv to the finger, 107.9 mSv to the wrist, 21.6 mSv to the leg and 49.3 mSv to the eye. Finally, the effect of the beam angulation (i.e. projection) and shielding equipment on the personnel doses was evaluated. The measurements were performed within the framework of the ORAMED (Optimization of RAdiation Protection for MEDical staff) project.

As in any medical intervention, there is either a known or an anticipated benefit to the patient from undergoing a medical imaging procedure. This benefit is generally significant, as demonstrated by the manner in which medical imaging has transformed clinical medicine. At the same time, when it comes to imaging that deploys ionising radiation, there is a potential associated risk from radiation. Radiation risk has been recognised as a key liability in the practice of medical imaging, creating a motivation for radiation dose optimisation. The level of radiation dose and risk in imaging varies but is generally low. Thus, from the epidemiological perspective, this makes the estimation of the precise level of associated risk highly uncertain. However, in spite of the low magnitude and high uncertainty of this risk, its possibility cannot easily be refuted. Therefore, given the moral obligation of healthcare providers, 'first, do no harm,' there is an ethical obligation to mitigate this risk. Precisely how to achieve this goal scientifically and practically within a coherent system has been an open question. To address this need, in 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organised a summit to clarify the role of Diagnostic Reference Levels to optimise imaging dose, summarised into an initial report (Järvinen et al 2017 Journal of Medical Imaging 4 031214). Through a consensus building exercise, the summit further concluded that the imaging optimisation goal goes beyond dose alone, and should include image quality as a means to include both the benefit and the safety of the exam. The present, second report details the deliberation of the summit on imaging optimisation.

Patient contact shielding has been in use for many years in radiology departments in order to reduce the effects and risks of ionising radiation on certain organs. New technologies in projection imaging and CT scanning such as digital receptors and automatic exposure control systems have reduced doses and improved image consistency. These changes and a greater understanding of both the benefits and the risks from the use of shielding have led to a review of shielding use in radiology. A number of professional bodies have already issued guidance in this regard. This paper represents the current consensus view of the main bodies involved in radiation safety and imaging in Europe: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics, European Federation of Radiographer Societies, European Society of Radiology, European Society of Paediatric Radiology, EuroSafe Imaging, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), and European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology (EADMFR). It is based on the expert recommendations of the Gonad and Patient Shielding (GAPS) Group formed with the purpose of developing consensus in this area. The recommendations are intended to be clear and easy to use. They are intended as guidance, and they are developed using a multidisciplinary team approach. It is recognised that regulations, custom and practice vary widely on the use of patient shielding in Europe and it is hoped that these recommendations will inform a change management program that will benefit patients and staff.

• The radiation dose imparted during fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures can be high • Understanding of reference levels might help optimise interventional cardiological procedures • Optimisation by changing the systems' settings seems feasible in some cases • Procedure complexity and the patient's clinical problem should be taken into account.