PATIENT DOSE IN DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY UTILISING BMI CLASSIFICATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 184 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasileios I Metaxas ◽  
Gerasimos A Messaris ◽  
Aristea N Lekatou ◽  
Theodore G Petsas ◽  
George S Panayiotakis

Abstract Dose audit is important towards optimisation of patients’ radiation protection in diagnostic radiography. In this study, the effect of the body mass index (BMI) on radiation dose received by 1869 adult patients undergoing chest, abdomen, lumbar spine, kidneys and urinary bladder (KUB) and pelvis radiography in an X-ray room with a digital radiography system was investigated. Patients were categorised into three groups (normal, overweight and obese) based on the BMI values. The patients’ entrance surface air kerma (ESAK) and the effective dose (ED) were calculated based on the X-ray tube output, exposure parameters and technical data, as well as utilising appropriate conversion coefficients of the recorded kerma area product (KAP) values. The local diagnostic reference levels (LDRLs) were established at the 75th percentile of the distribution of ESAK and KAP values. Statistically, a significant increase was found in ESAK, KAP and ED values, for all examinations, both for overweight and obese patients compared to normal patients (Mann–Whitney test, p < 0.0001). Regarding the gender of the patients, a statistically significant increase was found in the dose values for male patients compared to female patients, except for the chest LAT examinations (Mann–Whitney test, p = 0.06). The percentage increase for chest PA, chest LAT, abdomen AP, lumbar spine AP, lumbar spine LAT, pelvis AP and KUB AP in overweight patients was 75%, 100%, 136%, 130%, 70%, 66% and 174% for median ESAK, 67%, 81%, 135%, 134%, 85%, 63% and 172% for median KAP, as well as 89%, 54%, 146%, 138%, 82%, 57% and 183% for median ED values, respectively. For obese patients, the corresponding increases were 200%, 186%, 459%, 345%, 203%, 150% and 785% for median ESAK, 200%, 185%, 423%, 357%, 227%, 142% and 597% for median KAP, as well as 222%, 156%, 446%, 363%, 218%, 136% and 625% for median ED. The corresponding LDRLs for overweight patients were 0.17 mGy, 1.21 mGy, 3.74 mGy, 7.70 mGy, 7.99 mGy, 4.07mGy, 5.03 mGy and 0.13 Gy cm2, 0.69 Gy cm2, 2.35 Gy cm2, 2.10 Gy cm2, 2.59 Gy cm2, 2.13 Gy cm2, 2.49 Gy cm2 in terms of ESAK and KAP values, respectively, while in the case of obese patients were 0.28 mGy, 1.82 mGy, 7.26 mGy, 15.10 mGy, 13.86 mGy, 6.89 mGy, 13.40 mGy and 0.21 Gy cm2, 1.10 Gy cm2, 4.68 Gy cm2, 4.01 Gy cm2, 4.80 Gy cm2, 3.27 Gy cm2, 6.02 Gy cm2, respectively. It can be concluded that overweight and obese patients received a significantly increased radiation dose. Careful adjustment of imaging protocols is needed for these patients to reduce patient dose, while keeping the image quality at an acceptable level. Additional studies need to be conducted for these patient groups, that could further contribute to the development of radiation protection culture in diagnostic radiography.

2020 ◽  
Vol 189 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Fotios O Efthymiou ◽  
Vasileios I Metaxas ◽  
Christos P Dimitroukas ◽  
George S Panayiotakis

Abstract In this study, the radiation dose received by 364 low body mass index (BMI) adult patients undergoing chest, abdomen, lumbar spine, kidneys and urinary bladder (KUB) and pelvis X-ray examinations in an X-ray room with a digital radiography system was evaluated. The patients’ kerma area product (KAP) values were recorded, and the entrance surface air kerma (ESAK) was calculated based on the X-ray tube output, exposure parameters and technical data. The 75th percentiles of the distribution of ESAK and KAP values were also estimated. The dose values were compared with the corresponding values for normal patients obtained from a previous survey in our hospital, as well as with the national and UK diagnostic reference levels (DRLs). The correlation of dose values with patient size metrics (mass, height, BMI) was also investigated. A statistically significant difference was found in KAP and the ESAK values between low BMI and normal patients (Mann–Whitney test, p &lt; 0.05), for all examinations studied. The percentage difference for chest PA, chest LAT, abdomen PA, lumbar spine AP, lumbar spine LAT, pelvis AP and KUB AP examinations was 40, 36, 48, 68, 57, 46 and 67% for median KAP and 26, 43, 52, 48, 19, 44 and 51% for median ESAK, respectively. The corresponding 75th percentiles for low BMI patients were 0.065, 0.349, 0.683, 1.54, 3.92, 1.11, 0.67 mGy and 0.042, 0.218, 0.450, 0.280, 0.598, 0.597, 0.267 Gycm2 in terms of ESAK and KAP values, respectively. They were 74–90% lower compared to the national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs), 35–84% and 58–82% compared to the UK DRLs, for ESAK and KAP values, respectively. Regarding the gender of the patients, no statistically significant difference was found in the dose values between female and male patients (Mann–Whitney test, p &gt; 0.05), for all examinations studied. A statistically significant correlation was found between ESAK and KAP values with BMI for KUB AP, pelvis AP, lumbar spine AP, lumbar spine LAT and chest PA, while for chest LAT examinations, only the ESAK were significantly correlated with BMI. They also significantly correlated with the mass for KUB AP, lumbar spine LAT, abdomen PA and chest PA examinations, while no significant correlation was found between the dose values and patients’ height. It can be concluded that the low BMI patients received a significantly reduced radiation dose compared to normal patients. Additional studies need to be conducted for these patient groups, which could contribute to the further development of a radiation protection culture in diagnostic radiography.


2009 ◽  
Vol 36 (6Part21) ◽  
pp. 2713-2713
Author(s):  
E Christodoulou ◽  
M Goodsitt ◽  
B Bailey ◽  
R Young

Author(s):  
Behzad Fouladi Dehaghi ◽  
Jamileh Deris ◽  
Maryam Mosavi Qahfarokhi ◽  
Ameneh Golbaghi ◽  
Leila Nematpour

Background: Nowadays ionizing radiation is widely used in medicine, research and industry. In medicine, ionizing radiation is used to diagnose diseases and in high doses to treat diseases such as cancer. Undoubtedly, most exposure to artificial sources is in the field of medical and diagnostic radiology. Therefore, practitioners in the field of diagnostic radiography and patients are exposed to ionizing radiation and its risks. On the other hand, despite the advantages and efficacy of diagnostic radiation in the medical field, overall less attention is paid to optimizing and controlling protection in medical radiation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the background ionizing radiation in Ahwaz diagnostic radiography centers. Methods: Ionization radiation levels were measured in and out of each center using gamma spectroscopy (Radiation Alert Inspector-EXP 15109) at a, b, c, d and e radiographic centers within one meter above the Earth's surface. Radiation levels within each center were measured at four locations (outside of center, secretary desk, and patient waiting room and behind the radiology room) both in X-ray machine operating and non-operating condition. The obtained data were analyzed by SPSS software.  Results: The inside ionization radiation dose in a, b, c, d and e radiographic centers were 0.121, 0.119, 0.126, 0132 and 0.128 μSv/h respectively. The outside ionization radiation dose in a, b, c, d and e radiographic centers were 0.094, 0.092, 0.093, 0.112 and 0.101 μSv/h respectively. Equivalent annual dose within and outside selected radiology centers were lower than the threshold (1 mSv / year). Conclusion: The results show that the ionizing radiation dose of the X-ray equipment examined in the radiology centers of Ahwaz is lower than the global standard.


Author(s):  
David G Sutton ◽  
Colin J Martin

The exposure to radiation of staff and members of the public is restricted by seeking suitable compromises between the three basic elements of time, distance, and shielding. This chapter deals with the design of X-ray facilities to ensure that the distance and shielding elements are used appropriately. Criteria in the form of dose constraints for staff and the public based on the ALARP principle are used together with occupancies of adjacent areas to determine acceptable dose levels. Methods for calculating doses from workloads in terms of patient dose data are described. The results are then combined with the dose criteria to derive transmission requirements for protective barriers. Specific requirements for secondary scattered radiation and primary beams in radiography are considered. The methodology is described together with practical examples of room design for different X-ray techniques and elements of personnel radiation protection are discussed.


2019 ◽  
Vol 188 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-204
Author(s):  
Y Lahfi ◽  
A Ismail

Abstract The aim of the present study was to evaluate the radiation exposure around the patient table as relative to the cardiologist position dose value. The dose rates at eight points presuming staff positions were measured for PA, LAO 30° and RAO 30° radiographic projections, and then normalized to the cardiologist’s position dose-rate value. The results show that in PA and RAO 30° projections, the normalized dose rate was higher by 9–22% at the right side of the table at a distance of 50 cm, while it was higher up to 31% at the left side for the same measured points in the LAO 30°. The differences of normalized dose rates for the both table sides were lower and decreased at farther positions. The obtained results correspond to the recommendations of staff radiation protection in Cath-labs with regards to X-ray tube and detector positions.


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Avi Ben-Shlomo ◽  
Gabriel Bartal ◽  
Morris Mosseri ◽  
Shay Shabat

The study aimed to determine how the effective dose (ED) in lumbar spine X-ray examinations is influenced by patient positioning considering the X-ray tube heel effect. The study used Monte Carlo simulation of the effective dose. Using the heel effect, positioning of the patient in the head to anode direction reduces the effective dose by 5% when compared with the head to cathode positioning.


2011 ◽  
Vol 149 (4) ◽  
pp. 424-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. K. Ofori ◽  
W. K. Antwi ◽  
L. Arthur ◽  
H. Duah

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document