ABSTRACT
At present, the Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine does not support the practice of self-referred whole-body CT screening of asymptomatic patients because: The procedure involves a non-trivial radiation dose, which assumes even greater significance in the context of an ongoing screening programme; There is a high likelihood of false positives requiring further intervention with its attendant risks; and There is no proven evidence to date that early detection of life-threatening disease by CT has a significant positive effect on patient outcome. The ACPSEM will continue to monitor scientific studies concerning this procedure.
Subject(s)
Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/standards , Whole-Body Counting/methods , Advisory Committees , Australia , Physician Self-Referral , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Radiation Injuries/etiology , Radiation Injuries/prevention & control , Societies , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/adverse effects , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/trends , Whole-Body Counting/standardsABSTRACT
In 1989 the ACPSEM published a position paper entitled "A Quality Assurance Programme for Mass Screening in Mammography". This paper described test parameters and performance specifications for the equipment related aspects of a mammography quality assurance program. Advice on test equipment selection was also provided. In the intervening period of time there have been considerable advances in mammography technology creating a need to review a number of the paper's recommendations. There have also been considerable developments in the mammography quality assurance (QA) field, not the least of which includes the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program (ACR-MAP) and the similarly structured Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists' Mammography Accreditation Program (RANZCR-MAP). In light of these developments it was decided by the Radiology Interest Group to review the ACPSEM position on those aspects of mammography QA that fall within the medical physicist's area of expertise. This document represents the outcome of those deliberations.
Subject(s)
Mammography/standards , Australia , Biophysical Phenomena , Biophysics , Female , Humans , Mammography/instrumentation , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Quality Control , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
Transmission data for a fibre cement wallboard (villaboard) are determined for use in diagnostic shielding designs. Villaboard is found to be more attenuating than plasterboard e.g. 9 mm of villaboard is equivalent to 16 mm of plasterboard.
Subject(s)
Construction Materials , Radiation Protection/instrumentation , Biophysical Phenomena , Biophysics , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Female , Humans , Mammography , Radiography, DentalABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to confirm that the radiation doses received by attendants who manually restrain infants during fluoroscopic procedures are low. Doses to the hands and neck of three radiologists and three nurses performing or assisting at all the fluoroscopic procedures in a children's hospital were measured for 1 month using thermoluminescent dosemeters. All fluoroscopy on children at this hospital is performed without an antiscatter grid. Total doses for the neck ranged from 20 to 50 microSv per week and for hands from 40 to 210 microSv per week. These doses were shared by the three radiologists and the three nurses. Individual doses received per staff member are very small when compared with the doses received by interventional radiology staff. Doses received by staff in this study were of the order of 5% of the limit advised by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) for radiation workers. Nurses received larger doses than radiologists and steps will be taken to reduce this dose further.