Survey of dose area product received by patients undergoing common radiological examinations in four centers in Nigeria

Abstract

Patient dosimetry studies in diagnostic radiology in Nigeria have been on measurement of entrance skin dose and effective dose. Another important and easy to measure radiation dose descriptor that could be used to assess patient dose in radiological procedures is dose area product (DAP). Knowledge of DAP with location and projection of X‐ray beam allows direct calculation of organ dose and effective dose. In this study, DAP for commonly performed radiological examinations (abdomen, chest, lumbo sacral joint, pelvis, paranasal sinus, and skull) in four diagnostic centers in Nigeria were determined. These centers comprise of three classes of health care center namely tertiary, private, and specialist hospitals. Mathematical method was used to determine DAP received by 336 patients undergoing radiological examinations at the selected diagnostic centers. The DAP received by patient from each radiological examination varies from center to center. The range factor (RF) of DAP for individual patients ranged from 1.55–4.56, while RF of DAP among the selected centers was 2.27–55.84. The highest RF of DAP (55.84) was obtained from X‐ray examination of the chest. This variation was due to the application of anti‐scatter grid, and high kVp and high mAs values for chest examination by only one of the centers. The very wide variation in DAP found among diagnostic centers in this survey showed that there is need to harmonize radiological techniques of common X‐ray examination among different diagnostic centers. This would ensure optimal protection of patient against excessive radiation dose.PACS numbers: 87.53.Bn; 87.59.B

Local reference dose evaluation in conventional radiography examinations in Iran

“…At the same time, the patient dose in the present study for these examinations are smaller than analogous figures acquired by Bahreyni Toossi et al, (1516) Akinlade et al, (17) and similar data obtained by UNSCEAR 2000 in New Zealand and Finland. (11) A comparison of the studies for other radiographic examination (abdomen (AP), lumbar spine (AP, LAT), pelvis (AP), skull (AP/PA, LAT), and cervical spine (AP, LAT)) based on average DAP values show that results of this study are lower than most other international reports presented in Table 4, but higher than Bahreyni Toossi et al (15) in Sabzevar that used a similar film screen speed.…”

“…for good radiographic image in this province 7 , 10 , 11 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 . As 4, 5 show, this weakness was also seen in Bahreyni Toosi et al in Tehran, Mashhad, and Sabzovar 15 , 16 , 20 …”

“…Table 4 presents results for NRPB 2000 (W14) and NRPB 2005 (HPA‐RPD‐029) for average dose and UNSCEAR 2000 recorded for nationwide patient dose evaluations conducted in Germany, New Zealand, and Finland. Also included are the results of a study by Akinlade et al conducted on a limited scale in four hospitals in Nigeria 7 , 10 , 11 , 15 , 16 , 17 …”

A Survey of Radiation Exposure Techniques Factors Used for Common Diagnostics X- Ray Examinations in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria

“…For example, in tube loading (mAs) settings, for pelvis examination, the range selected in this study was within the values of mAs reported in UK (Akinlade, et al, 2012). Comparing the mAs selected for skull examination in this study to other studies elsewhere shows variations in values selected for same examination (Bouzarjomehri, 2004).…”

Evaluation of Occupational and Patient Dose in Challenging Hemodialysis Catheter Placement

“…Previous dosimetric studies on radiation dose to physicians during interventional radiology had demonstrated that if radiologists do not use suitable radiation protective devices, their radiation dose could exceed the annual dose limit (7). There are also some reports of the occurrence of deterministic effects in interventionists (8)(9)(10).…”