The study of protection of operators and surrounding workers at the time of using portable intraoral X-ray unit

Hand-held dental X-ray device: Attention to correct use

“… 4 However, the use of portable hand-held X-ray devices in routine dental care is not recommended due to the secondary radiation dose that the operator may receive during radiographic examinations. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 …”

“…These precautions are particularly crucial when the operator is in close proximity to both the radiation source and the patient. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Additionally, staff members and the public should maintain a distance of 2 meters from both the patient and the radiation source, and avoid standing in the path of the central X-ray beam.…”

“…Even if the equivalent dose in the head and extremity regions of the portable device operator does not exceed 0.6 mSv/year and 20 mSv/year respectively, which are within the limits deemed acceptable by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 it is necessary to consider the linear non-threshold (LNT) theory. The LNT theory posits a linear relationship between the dose and the risk of inducing stochastic effects, even at low doses, implying that there is no safe dose limit.…”

Evaluation of stray radiation to the operator for five hand-held dental X-ray devices

“…[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] For these studies, the strength of conclusions is limited by aspects of the methodologies or study protocols. Key limiting factors in the methodologies include: use of an inappropriate phantom to represent the patient that could affect the stray radiation field that is measured, as opposed to a tissue-equivalent phantom that would accurately recreate the stray radiation field 6,7,10,11 ; use of inappropriate means or detector for measurement of radiation dose given the X-ray imaging technique, 7,11,14 and; inadequate number of measurement points, which may not adequately characterize the heterogeneous stray radiation field around the operator of a HIDXD. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] In the referenced previous studies, no more than 12 measurement points were used when the number of points was specified.…”

“…Key limiting factors in the methodologies include: use of an inappropriate phantom to represent the patient that could affect the stray radiation field that is measured, as opposed to a tissue-equivalent phantom that would accurately recreate the stray radiation field 6,7,10,11 ; use of inappropriate means or detector for measurement of radiation dose given the X-ray imaging technique, 7,11,14 and; inadequate number of measurement points, which may not adequately characterize the heterogeneous stray radiation field around the operator of a HIDXD. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] In the referenced previous studies, no more than 12 measurement points were used when the number of points was specified. Limiting factors with regards to radiation detectors include use of a detector with an inadequate response time of greater than 0.25 s which may not reliably measure the air kerma from shorter exposure times of dental X-ray devices which were used in previous studies.…”