Occupational risk from static magnetic fields of MRI scanners

Karpowicz, Jolanta; Hietanen, Maila; Gryz, Krzysztof

doi:10.1007/s10669-007-9064-1

Cited by 22 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, when the clinical needs force them to move close to the scanner during the examination, they could also be exposed to the other two types of radiation. These concerns have also been raised recently [ 16 , 105 ] and to protect occupational workers, European Union has required to incorporate the physical agents directive (PAD) 2004/40/EC [ 106 ] into its legislation, which, in some cases, could restrict the use of MRIs.…”

Section: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (Mri)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Effects and Safety in Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Review

Hartwig

Giovannetti

Vanello

et al. 2009

IJERPH

202

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the introduction of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) as a diagnostic technique, the number of people exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has increased dramatically. In this review, based on the results of a pioneer study showing in vitro and in vivo genotoxic effects of MRI scans, we report an updated survey about the effects of non-ionizing EMF employed in MRI, relevant for patients’ and workers’ safety. While the whole data does not confirm a risk hypothesis, it suggests a need for further studies and prudent use in order to avoid unnecessary examinations, according to the precautionary principle.

show abstract

Section: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (Mri)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Effects and Safety in Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Review

Hartwig

Giovannetti

Vanello

et al. 2009

IJERPH

202

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The MR operator may only be present in the MR scanner room during interventional procedures or when assisting patients with severe medical conditions. According to Karpowicz et al [16], Gourzoulidis et al [17], Frankel et al [3], and Rathebe [9], exposure to RF fields is associated with thermal effects and excitation of electrosensitive tissues, which could lead to thermoregulatory failure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure levels of radiofrequency magnetic fields and static magnetic fields in 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI units

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staff is exposed to a complex mixture of electromagnetic fields from MRI units. Exposure to these fields results in the development of transient exposure-related symptoms. This study aimed to investigate the exposure levels of radiofrequency (RF) magnetic fields and static magnetic fields (SMFs) from 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI scanners in two public hospitals in the Mangaung Metropolitan region, South Africa. The exposure levels of SMFs and RF magnetic fields were measured using the THM1176 3-Axis hall magnetometer and TM-196 3 Axis RF field strength meter, respectively. Measurements were collected at a distance of 1 m (m) and 2 m from the gantry for SMFs when the brain, cervical spine and extremities were scanned. Measurements for RF magnetic fields were collected at a distance of 1 m with an average scan duration of six minutes. Friedman’s test was used to compared exposure mean values from two 1.5 T scanners, and Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni adjustment was used to identify where the difference between exist. The Shapiro–Wilk test was also used to test for normality between exposure levels in 1.5 and 3.0 T scanners. The measured peak values for SMFs from the 3.0 T scanner at hospital A were 1300 milliTesla (mT) and 726 mT from 1.5 T scanner in hospital B. The difference in terms of SMFs exposure levels was observed between two 1.5 T scanners at a distance of 2 m. The difference between 1.5 T scanners at 1 m was also observed during repeated measurements when brain, cervical spine and extremities scans were performed. Scanners’ configurations, magnet type, clinical setting and location were identified as factors that could influence different propagation of SMFs between scanners of the same nominal B0. The RF pulse design, sequence setting flip-angle and scans performed influenced the measured RF magnetic fields. Three scanners were complaint with occupational exposure guidelines stipulated by the ICNIRP; however, peak levels that exist at 1 m could be managed through adoption of occupational health and safety programs.

show abstract

“…Various studies have aimed to measure or estimate SMF and TVMF exposure levels of individual workers at MRI or NMR facilities . Exposure to static and time‐varying magnetic fields was found to be highly variable between different MRI workers, but also exposure levels within the same individuals could differ from day to day .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%