Evaluation of the effectiveness of X-ray protective aprons in experimental and practical fields

Abstract

Few practical evaluation studies have been conducted on X-ray protective aprons in workplaces. We examined the effects of exchanging the protective apron type with regard to exposure reduction in experimental and practical fields, and discuss the effectiveness of X-ray protective aprons. Experimental field evaluations were performed by the measurement of the X-ray transmission rates of protective aprons. Practical field evaluations were performed by the estimation of the differences in the transit doses before and after the apron exchange. A 0.50-mm lead-equivalent-thick non-lead apron had the lowest transmission rate among the 7 protective aprons, but weighed 10.9 kg and was too heavy. The 0.25 and 0.35-mm lead-equivalent-thick non-lead aprons differed little in the practical field of interventional radiology. The 0.35-mm lead apron had lower X-ray transmission rates and transit doses than the 0.25-mm lead-equivalent-thick non-lead apron, and each of these differences exceeded 8 % in the experimental field and approximately 0.15 mSv/month in the practical field of computed tomography (p < 0.01). Therefore, we concluded that the 0.25-mm lead-equivalent-thick aprons and 0.35-mm lead apron are effective for interventional radiology operators and computed tomography nurses, respectively.

Characterisation and mapping of scattered radiation fields in interventional radiology theatres

“…5 ). Mori and McCaffrey 32 , 33 show that this difference in the mean energy can lead to a 12% higher X-ray transmission rate of protective aprons. Figure 5 was of particular interest when we presented the results to the staff and raised questions.…”

Are Antimony-Bismuth Aprons as Efficient as Lead Rubber Aprons in Providing Shielding against Scattered Radiation?

“…One lead, and two lead-free aprons were tested for x-ray absorption ability in both the primary and scattered radiation fields. The method for the measurements performed in this study (with and without the aprons) is based on methods described in previous studies 5, [14][15][16] .…”

“…Prior to data collection, variability of the dose measurement for the selected tube voltages and a variation coefficient for primary radiation field (2.8%) and scatter radiation field (3.0%) was determined 15,18 .…”

Cs-137 Gamma Ray Attenuation Properties of Flexible Silicone Rubber Materials

“…Therefore, there were remarkable studies to get lead-free materials for radiation shielding applications. Tungsten, bismuth, antimony, iron and barium was among the candidate materials for radiation shielding instead of lead [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. On the other hand, some of the alternative materials have more expensive production cots whereas some of them have bigger lead equivalent thickness and weight.…”