Status of radiation protection in interventional cardiology in four East European countries

Ciraj-Bjelac, Olivera; Beganović, Adnan; Faj, Dario; Ivanovic, Sonja; Videnović, Ivan R.; Rehani, Madan M.

doi:10.1093/rpd/ncr268

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, these surveys have not had the wide scope of the present investigation. They have been either limited to certain geographical regions (Borrás 1997, Fleitas et al 2006, Ciraj-Bjelac et al 2011, to specific modalities (Borrás et al 2003, Vassileva et al 2012, Muhogora et al 2008, 2010, Tsapaki et al 2009 or their purpose was to obtain a snapshot of practices in a few selected areas (IAEA 1995(IAEA , 2004(IAEA , 2005(IAEA , 2010. Several of the IAEA studies concluded that there was considerable scope for improvement in the implementation of optimisation (Muhogora et al 2010, Ciraj-Bjelac et al 2011, Vassileva et al 2012.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches to aspects of optimisation of protection in diagnostic radiology in six continents

Martin¹,

Heron²,

Borrás³

et al. 2013

J. Radiol. Prot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been an expansion in the use of x-ray imaging during the last 20 years. Effective arrangements for justification of exposures as well as for optimisation of protection are crucial. The amount of effort put into the latter, the way in which it is organised and the groups carrying this out vary across the globe. A simple survey of organisational arrangements relating to performance testing of x-ray equipment, management of patient dose and other aspects of implementing optimisation has been undertaken. A total of 137 completed survey forms were received from medical physicists in 48 countries. Results for individual countries from which more responses were received, or for groups of neighbouring ones, are compared to portray variations. Some performance testing of x-ray equipment was mandated in most countries (more than 90%), with the tests being performed primarily by hospital or private medical physicists, although other groups are involved. Testing of equipment prior to clinical use was generally high for most regions, but the frequency was lower in Latin America. There was considerable variation in the frequency and regularity of subsequent testing. The prevalence of patient dose surveys was high in Europe, but lower in other continents. Organisational arrangements for testing performance of x-ray equipment, patient dose surveys and implementing optimisation of protection in medical exposures across the globe can be divided into five main groups. Hospital medical physicists take the lead in western Europe and Australia with the involvement of radiographers. Private medical physicists test equipment in Brazil, the USA and New Zealand, and have some responsibility for optimisation in Brazil. University personnel have significant involvement, together with medical physicists in eastern Europe, but the extent of the coverage is uncertain. Government personnel and service engineers carry out equipment testing in many countries of Africa and Asia, while radiographers have a significant role in Thailand and other countries where the number of medical physicists is limited. In order for dose surveys to have an impact, action must be taken upon the findings, but there must be an effective link between surveyors and radiology facility staff to ensure that this is done.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches to aspects of optimisation of protection in diagnostic radiology in six continents

Martin¹,

Heron²,

Borrás³

et al. 2013

J. Radiol. Prot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The placement and quantity of personal dosimeters worn while using a shielding apron varies by country. In the United Kingdom and Eastern Europe, the dosimeter is recommended to be worn under the apron [10,11]. This practice is in line with the International Commission on Radiological Protection's recommendations, which state that a single dosimeter worn under a lead apron can provide a reasonable estimate of the effective dose [12] and measure the dose to which protected organs are exposed [10].…”

Section: Jrprmentioning

confidence: 91%

Personal Dosimeters Worn by Radiation Workers in Korea: Actual Condition and Consideration of Their Proper Application for Radiation Protection

Noh,

Lee,

Park

et al. 2023

J Radiat Prot Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Assessment of the radiation doses to which workers are exposed can differ depending on the placement of dosimeters on the body. In addition, it is affected by whether the placement is under or over a shielding apron. This study aimed to evaluate the actual positioning of personal dosimeters on the body, with or without shielding aprons, among radiation workers in Korea.Materials and Methods: We analyzed the survey data, which included demographic characteristics, such as sex, age, occupation, work history, and placement of the personal dosimeter being worn, from a cohort study of Korean radiation workers. We assessed the use of personal dosimeters among workers, stratified by sex, age, working period, starting year of work, and occupation.Results and Discussion: Overall, high compliance (89.1% to 99.0%) with the wearing of dosimeters on the chest was observed regardless of workers’ characteristics, such as age, sex, occupation, and work history. However, the placement of dosimeters, either under or over the shielding aprons, was inconsistent. Overall, 40.1% of workers wore dosimeters under their aprons, while the others wore dosimeters over their aprons. This inconsistency indicates that radiation doses are possibly measured differently under the same exposure conditions solely owing to variations in the placement of worn dosimeters.Conclusion: Although a lack of uniformity in dosimeter placement when wearing a shielding apron may not cause serious harm in radiation dose management for workers, the development of detailed guidelines for dosimeter placement may improve the accuracy of dose assessment.

show abstract

“…Projects include, among others, training, assessment of the radiation safety situation in each country or region as well as dissemination of information and provision of support to improve the existing situations. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Another method that has been utilized is providing support through publication of guidance and safety reports. One would suppose that, since regulations and guidance documents have been published for so long, their contribution to enhancing radiation safety would be undisputed and by now it would have been quantitatively known how much radiation protection has benefited due to regulations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on impact of regulations on radiation safety and development of radiation safety culture in 25 countries

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this work was to assess the: (a) impact of regulations on radiation safety and development of radiation safety culture, (b) perceived safety level in the participating facilities, (c) future needs regarding strengthening of regulations, patient dose consideration, and exposure tracking, in different countries around the world. Appropriate questionnaires probing the above-mentioned themes were sent to radiologic professionals working in healthcare facilities. A total of 257 responses from 25 countries were received and analyzed. Average scores for the three different sections/themes of the questionnaire ranged from 64.6% to 74.9%. Higher scores indicated stronger agreement of the survey participants with the theme in question. Statistical comparisons among different professional groups revealed that professionals in developing countries perceived regulations to be significantly more important for improving safety than their counterparts in developed countries did. Radiologic professionals believe that regulation enhances radiation safety and the development of safety culture. However, there is still room for improvement regarding the implementation of regulatory tools. Safety levels were perceived to be satisfactory, and future needs point toward strengthening of regulations regarding patient dose control, patient dose consideration, and patient exposure tracking. The results of this study should be interpreted keeping possible selection bias in view.

show abstract

Status of radiation protection in interventional cardiology in four East European countries

Cited by 6 publications

References 14 publications

Approaches to aspects of optimisation of protection in diagnostic radiology in six continents

Approaches to aspects of optimisation of protection in diagnostic radiology in six continents

Personal Dosimeters Worn by Radiation Workers in Korea: Actual Condition and Consideration of Their Proper Application for Radiation Protection

Survey on impact of regulations on radiation safety and development of radiation safety culture in 25 countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About