Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Radiology ; 300(3): 605-612, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34156301

ABSTRACT

Background Occupational doses to most medical radiation workers have declined substantially since the 1950s because of improvements in radiation protection practices. However, different patterns may have emerged for radiologic technologists working with nuclear medicine because of the higher per-procedure doses and increasing workloads. Purpose To summarize annual occupational doses during a 36-year period for a large cohort of U.S. radiologic technologists and to compare dose between general radiologic technologists and those specializing in nuclear medicine procedures. Materials and Methods Annual personal dose equivalents (referred to as doses) from 1980 to 2015 were summarized for 58 434 (62%) participants in the U.S. Radiologic Technologists (USRT) cohort who responded to the most recent mailed work history survey (years 2012-2014) and reported never regularly performing interventional procedures. Doses were partitioned according to the performance of nuclear medicine (yes or no, frequency, procedure type) by calendar year. Annual dose records were described by using summary statistics (eg, median and 25th and 75th percentiles). Results Median annual doses related to performance of general radiologic procedures decreased from 0.60 mSv (interquartile range [IQR], 0.10-1.9 mSv) in 1980 to levels below the limits of detection by 2015, whereas annual doses related to performance of nuclear medicine procedures remained relatively high during this period (median, 1.2 mSv; IQR, 0.12-3.0 mSv). Higher median annual doses were associated with more frequent (above vs below the median) performance of diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures (≥35 vs <35 times per week; 1.6 mSv [IQR, 0.30-3.3 mSv] and 0.9 mSv [IQR, 0.10-2.6 mSv]). Higher and more variable annual doses were associated with more frequent performance of cardiac nuclear medicine (≥10 times per week) and PET (nine or more times per week) examinations (median, 1.6 mSv [IQR, 0.30-2.2 mSv] and 2.2 mSv [IQR, 0.10-4.6 mSv], respectively). Conclusion Annual doses to U.S. radiologic technologists performing general radiologic procedures declined during a 36-year period. However, consistently higher and more variable doses were associated with the performance of nuclear medicine procedures, particularly cardiac nuclear medicine and PET procedures. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mettler and Guiberteau in this issue.


Subject(s)
Allied Health Personnel , Diagnostic Imaging/statistics & numerical data , Nuclear Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data , Technology, Radiologic , Adult , Humans , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Protection , United States
2.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 170(1-4): 307-10, 2016 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26891788

ABSTRACT

Dosemeter results for ∼81 500 people performing fluoroscopic and interventional radiology procedures were examined to identify differences between groups monitored either by using two dosemeters, one placed at the collar above the apron and a second placed under the apron on the torso (EDE1) or by using one single dosemeter placed at the collar above the apron (EDE2). The median annual HE was 0.17 mSv for those monitored using the EDE1 protocol and 0.26 mSv for the group using the EDE2 protocol. The EDE2 method was used most frequently with the EDE1 method preferred for those more highly exposed. Approximately, 22 % of dosemeter results for EDE1 were inconsistent with expected norms based on over and under apron dosemeter relationships.


Subject(s)
Fluoroscopy/methods , Lens, Crystalline/radiation effects , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Protective Clothing , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Monitoring/methods , Radiation Protection/methods , Algorithms , Eye Protective Devices , Humans , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Radiation Dosimeters , Radiography , Radiologists , Radiology, Interventional/methods , Radiometry , Workforce
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...