Medical radiation exposure from radiological and interventional procedures in Austria

Wachabauer, David; Mathis-Edenhofer, Stefan; Moshammer, Hanns

doi:10.1007/s00508-019-01557-0

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our comparison with other countries, the 2018 Swiss values were close to the values published in France in 2012 and 2017 ( 15 , 16 ) , in Germany in 2014 ( 17 ) , in Austria in 2015 ( 18 ) and in the USA for 2016 ( 19 ) . Like Switzerland, the frequencies of the radiography, mammography and dental radiology also remain stable in these countries.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Annual Exposure of the Swiss Population From Medical Imaging in 2018

Viry

Bize

Trueb

et al. 2021

Radiation Protection Dosimetry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nationwide surveys on radiation dose to the population from medical imaging are recommended in order to follow trends in population exposure. The goal of the 2018 survey was to investigate the current exposure. The invoice coding information was collected in five university hospitals and large clinics. To improve the estimation of the effective dose delivered in computed tomography (CT), we collected dose data from different Dose Archiving Communication Systems. On average, we found that 1.2 radiological examinations per year and per inhabitant were performed. Dental radiography was the most frequent examination (48% of all the X-ray examinations), followed by conventional radiography (36%) and CT (11%). The average annual effective dose was estimated to be 1.48 mSv per inhabitant, with CT representing 64% of that dose. Our results show that the exposure of the Swiss population from medical imaging has remained stable since 2013, despite a 15% increase in the number of CT examinations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Annual Exposure of the Swiss Population From Medical Imaging in 2018

Viry

Bize

Trueb

et al. 2021

Radiation Protection Dosimetry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the last study on Austrian NDRL for NUC by A Stemberger, T Leitha and A Staudenherz [21] , a report by the European Commission [14] on European NDRL, NDRL from Switzerland [13] and Germany [35] were included and discussed with a multidisciplinary expert group consisting of radiologists, medical physicists and radiographers as well as representatives from relevant societies. Frequencies of relevant NUC-examinations were taken from the Austrian-wide routine documentation data held and maintained by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Health [6] , [36] . Table 1 and Table 2 depict the examination types and indications included into the survey besides obligatory and optional parameters, respectively.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, some of the most common imaging methods, such as X-ray, computed tomography (CT) as well as nuclear medicine imaging (NUC) procedures, such as scintigraphy, single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) make use of ionizing radiation, and, thus, inherently imply radiation exposure to patients [1] . Even though the exposure from diagnostic procedures is small (in the range of 0.01 mSv to 20 mSv effective dose) and eventual negative effects of such small exposures are controversially discussed [2] , [3] , [4] , in sum they substantially contribute to the general radiation exposure of the population [1] , [5] , [6] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%