Eye dosimetry and protective eyewear for interventional clinicians.

Doses to the eyes of interventional clinicians can exceed 20 mSv. Various protective devices can afford protection to the eyes with the final barrier being protective eyewear. The protection provided by lead glasses is difficult to quantify, and the majority of dosimeters are not designed to be worn under lead glasses. This study has measured dose reduction factors (DRFs) equal to the ratio of the dose with no protection, divided by that when lead glasses are worn. Glasses have been tested in X-ray fields using anthropomorphic phantoms to simulate the patient and clinician. DRFs for X-rays incident from the front vary from 5.2 to 7.6, while values for orientations reminiscent of clinical practice are between 1.4 and 5.2. Results suggest that a DRF of two is a conservative factor that could be applied to personal dosimeter measurements to account for the dose reduction provided by most types of lead glasses.

Optimisation of occupational radiological protection in image-guided interventions: potential impact of dose rate measurements.

The optimisation of occupational radiological protection is challenging and a variety of factors have to be considered. Physicians performing image-guided interventions are working in an environment with one of the highest radiation risk levels in healthcare. Appropriate knowledge about the radiation environment is a prerequisite for conducting the optimisation process. Information about the dose rate variation during the interventions could provide valuable input to this process. The overall purpose of this study was to explore the prerequisite and feasibility to measure dose rate in scattered radiation and to assess the usefulness of such data in the optimisation process.Using an active dosimeter system, the dose rate in the unshielded scattered radiation field was measured in a fixed point close to the patient undergoing an image-guided intervention. The measurements were performed with a time resolution of one second and the dose rate data was continuously timed in a data log. In two treatment rooms, data was collected during a 6 month time period, resulting in data from 380 image-guided interventions and vascular treatments in the abdomen, arms and legs. These procedures were categorised into eight types according to the purpose of the treatment and the anatomical region involved.The dose rate varied substantially between treatment types, both regarding the levels and the distribution during the procedure. The maximum dose rate for different types of interventions varied typically between 5 and 100 mSv h(-1), but substantially higher and lower dose rates were also registered. The average dose rate during a complete procedure was however substantially lower and varied typically between 0.05 and 1 mSv h(-1). An analysis of the distribution disclosed that for a large part of the treatment types, the major amount of the total accumulated dose for a procedure was delivered in less than 10% of the exposure time and in less than 1% of the total procedure time.The present study shows that systematic dose rate measurements are feasible. Such measurements can be used to give a general indication of the exposure level to the staff and could serve as a first risk assessment tool when introducing new treatment types or x-ray equipment in the clinic. For example, it could provide an indication for when detailed eye dose measurements are needed. It also gives input to risk management considerations and the development of efficient routines for other radiological protection measures.

Evaluation of the impact of a system for real-time visualisation of occupational radiation dose rate during fluoroscopically guided procedures.

Optimisation of radiological protection for operators working with fluoroscopically guided procedures has to be performed during the procedure, under varying and difficult conditions. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of a system for real-time visualisation of radiation dose rate on optimisation of occupational radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures. Individual radiation dose measurements, using a system for real-time visualisation, were performed in a cardiology laboratory for three cardiologists and ten assisting nurses. Radiation doses collected when the radiation dose rates were not displayed to the staff were compared to radiation doses collected when the radiation dose rates were displayed. When the radiation dose rates were displayed to the staff, one cardiologist and the assisting nurses (as a group) significantly reduced their personal radiation doses. The median radiation dose (Hp(10)) per procedure decreased from 68 to 28 µSv (p = 0.003) for this cardiologist and from 4.3 to 2.5 µSv (p = 0.001) for the assisting nurses. The results of the present study indicate that a system for real-time visualisation of radiation dose rate may have a positive impact on optimisation of occupational radiological protection. In particular, this may affect the behaviour of staff members practising inadequate personal radiological protection.