Comparison of Five Developed Algorithms to Estimate Staff Effective Dose in Interventional Cardiology: Are They Interchangeable?

Abstract

Introduction: Interventional procedures are becoming substantial contributors to collective radiation dose due to their increasing rate of application. This study examined the relationships between effective dose data derived from five developed algorithms (Netherlands Commission on Radiation Dosimetry (NCS) and National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRPs) algorithms for single dosimetry and Niklason, NCRPd and Clerinx algorithms for double dosimetry) to assess whether they can be used interchangeably in the assessment of staff effective dose in interventional cardiology. Material and Methods: The study population consisted of thirteen radiation workers (eight cardiologists, two technicians and three nurses) were involved in cardiac interventional procedures. Effective doses with thermoluminescence dosemeters were estimated for the duration of two months using five algorithms. The linear correlation and Bland-Altman analysis were performed to assess relationships and the agreement between effective doses calculated by the algorithms respectively. Results and Conclusion: We found significant correlation coefficients between the all effective doses calculated using the algorithms. Comparisons of two algorithms showed significant differences between estimated effective doses (p < 0 05) with the exception of results obtained by NCS versus NCRPd and NCS versus Niklason algorithms (p > 0 05). Limit of agreements were wide (NCS vs. NCRPd: −0.406 to 0.280 mSv and NCS vs. Niklason: −0.035 to 0.401 mSv, respectively) and considerable disagreement was found between these algorithms and despite strong correlations, should not be used interchangeably for assessment of effective dose.

Evaluating Occupational Radiation Exposure in Interventional Cardiology: An Investigation into Estimating Effective Dose

“…This eliminates the need for an additional dosimeter placed under the lead apron, which is typically used for shielding against radiation. Similar research conducted by Kuipers et al (2008), Dalah et al (2018), andMoladoust et al (2015) also yielded comparable results, reinforcing the idea that a single dosimeter placed above the protective thyroid collar is sufficient for accurate dose assessment in fluoroscopy scenarios. However, an important finding emerged from the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, which highlighted significant differences between the direct readings of dosimeters placed with shielding and those placed without.…”

“…In other words, the protective barrier of the lead apron does influence the radiation dose recorded by the dosimeter underneath it. The research by Moladoust et al (2015) cautioned against swapping measurements between shielded and unshielded positions based on this significant difference. This underscores the importance of maintaining consistency in the approach to radiation dose assessment.…”