Radiation Safety and Education in the Applicants of the Final Test for the Expert of Pain Medicine

Park, Pyong Eun; Park, Jung Min; Kang, Joo Eun; Cho, Jaehun; Cho, Suk Ju; Kim, Jae‐Hun; Sim, Woo Seog; Kim, Yong Chul

doi:10.3344/kjp.2012.25.1.16

Cited by 29 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, garments should be monitored annually with fluoroscopy to check for holes and reduced shielding integrity [7]. To make fluoroscopy use safer, education about, attention to, and practices of radiation safety should be required for all pain physicians [18]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Survey about the Degree of Damage of Radiation-Protective Shields in Operation Room

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMedical doctors who perform C-arm fluoroscopy-guided procedures are exposed to X-ray radiation. Therefore, radiation-protective shields are recommended to protect these doctors from radiation. For the past several years, these protective shields have sometimes been used without regular inspection. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree of damage to radiation-protective shields in the operating room.MethodsThis study investigated 98 radiation-protective shields in the operation rooms of Konkuk University Medical Center and Jeju National University Hospital. We examined whether these shields were damaged or not with the unaided eye and by fluoroscopy.ResultsThere were seventy-one aprons and twenty-seven thyroid protectors in the two university hospitals. Fourteen aprons (19.7%) were damaged, whereas no thyroid protectors (0%) were. Of the twenty-six aprons, which have been used since 2005, eleven (42.3%) were damaged. Of the ten aprons, which have been used since 2008, none (0%) was damaged. Of the twenty-three aprons that have been used since 2009, two (8.7%) of them were damaged. Of the eight aprons used since 2010, one (12.3%) was damaged. Of the four aprons used since 2011, none (0%) of them were damaged. The most common site of damage to the radiation-protective shields was at the waist of the aprons (51%).ConclusionsAs a result, aprons that have been used for a long period of time can have a higher risk of damage. Radiation-protective shields should be inspected regularly and exchanged for new products for the safety of medical workers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Survey about the Degree of Damage of Radiation-Protective Shields in Operation Room

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, the reduction of irradiation exposure to the operator has been a key issue among pain physicians [6]. …”

Section: Letter To Editorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Fluoroscopy-guided Suprascapular Nerve Block Better Than Other Techniques?

Shim

2013

Korean J Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is common practice to wear lead aprons during fluoroscopy-guided procedures, and many pain physicians use thyroid shields routinely. Lead gloves, however, are not routinely used by pain physicians [2]. During fluoroscopy-guided procedures, pain physicians may be at risk from ionizing radiation both directly from the primary beam and indirectly via scattered radiation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation Exposure of the Hand and Chest during C-arm Fluoroscopy-Guided Procedures

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe C-arm fluoroscope is an essential tool for the intervention of pain. The aim of this study was to investigate the radiation exposure experienced by the hand and chest of pain physicians during C-arm fluoroscopy-guided procedures.MethodsThis is a prospective study about radiation exposure to physicians during transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) and medial branch block (MBB). Four pain physicians were involved in this study. Data about effective dose (ED) at each physician's right hand and left side of the chest, exposure time, radiation absorbed dose (RAD), and the distance from the center of the X-ray field to the physician during X-ray scanning were collected.ResultsThree hundred and fifteen cases were included for this study. Demographic data showed no significant differences among the physicians in the TFESIs and MBBs. In the TFESI group, there was a significant difference between the ED at the hand and chest in all the physicians. In physician A, B and C, the ED at the chest was more than the ED at the hand. The distance from the center of the X-ray field to physician A was more than that of the other physicians, and for the exposure time, the ED and RAD in physician A was less than that of the other physicians. In the MBB group, there was no difference in the ED at the hand and chest, except for physician D. The distance from the center of the X-ray field to physician A was more than that of the other physicians and the exposure time in physician A was less than that of the other physicians.ConclusionsIn conclusion, the distance from the radiation source, position of the hand, experience and technique can correlate with the radiation dose.

show abstract

Radiation Safety and Education in the Applicants of the Final Test for the Expert of Pain Medicine

Cited by 29 publications

References 14 publications

The Survey about the Degree of Damage of Radiation-Protective Shields in Operation Room

The Survey about the Degree of Damage of Radiation-Protective Shields in Operation Room

Is Fluoroscopy-guided Suprascapular Nerve Block Better Than Other Techniques?

Radiation Exposure of the Hand and Chest during C-arm Fluoroscopy-Guided Procedures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About