Patient dose measurement in common medical X-ray examinations and propose the first local dose reference levels to diagnostic radiology in Iran

Abstract

Introduction: The main purpose of this study was to investigate patient dose in pelvic and abdomen x-ray examinations. This work also provided the LDRLs (local diagnostic reference levels) in Khuzestan region, southwest of Iran to help establish the NDRLs (national diagnostic reference levels). Methods: Patient doses were assessed from patient's anatomical data and exposure parameters based on the IAEA indirect dosimetry method. With regard to this method, exposure parameters such as tube output, kVp, mAs, FFD and patient anatomical data were used for calculating ESD (entrance skin dose) of patients. This study was conducted on 250 standard patients (50% men and 50% women) at eight high-patient-load imaging centers. Results: The results indicate that mean ESDs for the both pelvic and abdomen examinations were lower than the IAEA and EC reference levels, 2.3 and 3.7 mGy, respectively. Mean applied kVps were 67 and 70 and mean FFDs were 103 and 109, respectively. Tube loadings obtained in this study for pelvic examination were lower than all the corresponding values in the reviewed literature. Likewise, the average annual patient load across all hospitals were more than 37000 patients, i.e. more than 100 patients a day. Conclusions: The authors recommend that DRLs (diagnostic reference levels) obtained in this region, which are the first available data, can be used as local DRLs for pelvic and abdomen procedures. This work also provides that on-the-job training programs for staffs and close cross collaboration between physicists and physicians should be strongly considered.

Assessment of Patient’s Dose During Ap Pelvis Radiographic Examination in Selected Hospitals of Al Najaf City, Iraq

“…The minimum and the maximum tube loading (mAs) that were used for AP pelvis radiography is (13.6-35.38 mAs). The current average values of the mAs are almost similar to those reported in literature [6][7][8][9][10]. The SID recorded for AP pelvis radiography is ranged from 100 cm 123 cm.…”

“…Therefore, protecting patients gonads from unnecessary radiation dose is paramount during anterior-posterior (AP) pelvis radiography. Measurement of patient dose during AP pelvis X-ray examination was one of the aims of many researches [7][8][9][10]. However, other research attempts were conducted to minimize the patient dose during AP pelvis radiographic examination through optimizing its radiographic practice [11][12][13].…”

Entrance Skin Dose (ESD) and Bucky Table Induced Backscattered Dose (BTI-BSD) in Abdominal Radiography With nanoDot Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimeter (OSLD)

“…In this study, the kVp and mAs used were a little bit different from those used in other studies [2,15,10,47].…”

Awareness assessment of radiation protection, dose levels and complications of radiation exposure in imaging procedures among radiology residents, undergraduate radiology students, radiologists and technicians.

“…Several cases raise the level of radiation knowledge in staffs, patients, and physicians. Continuous beam training increases radiation safety and reduces fear of radiation (27,31,32), as well as determining radiation levels and dose level references for each region (17) and monitoring personnel radiation measures are two other effective strategies (33). In our study, it was clearly demonstrated that the dose received in nuclear medicine tests (more than 500 times that of Chest PA) increased the risk of cancer in younger people, especially in vulnerable tissues.…”

“…An overall review of the previous study, indicates that radiologists and technologists who are employed in different sections have inadequate information about ionizing beams, or they underestimate its harms (13)(14)(15)(16). All the same, another study claims that reducing the dose level in X-Ray examinations is possible if imaging center staff get appropriate training (17). Today, by spreading information, clienteles of imaging centers inquire about potential perils of "imaging procedures."…”