scholarly journals Patient Knowledge Regarding Radiation Exposure from Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Imaging

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011418S0015
Author(s):  
Daniel Bohl ◽  
Blaine Manning ◽  
George Holmes ◽  
Simon Lee ◽  
Johnny Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Cone Beam Ct ◽  
Plain Film ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
X Ray

Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Foot and ankle surgeons routinely prescribe diagnostic imaging that exposes patients to potentially harmful ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study is to characterize patients’ knowledge regarding radiation exposure associated with common forms of foot and ankle imaging. Methods: A survey was administered to all new patients prior to their first foot and ankle clinic appointments. Patients were asked to compare the amount of harmful radiation associated with chest x-rays to that associated with various types of foot and ankle imaging. Results were tabulated and compared to actual values of radiation exposure from the published literature. Results: A total of 890 patients were invited to participate, of whom 791 (88.9%) completed the survey. The majority of patients believed that a foot x-ray, an ankle x-ray, a “low dose” CT scan of the foot and ankle (alluding to cone-beam CT), and a traditional CT scan of the foot and ankle all contain similar amounts of harmful ionizing radiation to a chest x-ray (Table 1). This is in contrast to the published literature, which suggests that foot x-rays, ankle x-rays, cone beam CT scans of the foot and ankle, and traditional CT scans of the foot and ankle expose patients to 0.006, 0.006, 0.127, and 0.833 chest x-rays worth of radiation. Conclusion: The results of the present study suggest that patients greatly over-estimate the amount of harmful ionizing radiation associated with plain film and cone-beam CT scans of the foot and ankle. Interestingly, their estimates of radiation associated with traditional CT scans of the foot and ankle were relatively accurate. Results suggest that patients may benefit from increased counseling by surgeons regarding the relatively low risk of radiation exposure associated with plain film and cone-beam CT imaging of the foot and ankle.

Patient Knowledge Regarding Radiation Exposure From Foot and Ankle Imaging

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 324-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blaine T. Manning ◽  
Daniel D. Bohl ◽  
Alexander J. P. Idarraga ◽  
George B. Holmes ◽  
Simon Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Cone Beam Ct ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Imaging Results

Foot and ankle surgeons routinely prescribe diagnostic imaging that exposes patients to potentially harmful ionizing radiation. It is unclear how well patients understand the radiation to which they are exposed. In this study, 946 consecutive new patients were surveyed regarding medical imaging and radiation exposure prior to their first appointment. Respondents compared the amount of radiation associated with chest X-rays (CXRs) with various types of foot and ankle imaging. Results were compared with actual values of radiation exposure from the published literature. Of 946 patients surveyed, 841 (88.9%) participated. Most had private insurance (82.8%) and a bachelor’s degree or higher (60.6%). Most believed that foot X-ray, ankle X-ray, “low dose” foot and ankle computed tomography (CT) scan (alluding to cone-beam CT), and traditional foot and ankle CT scan contain similar amounts of ionizing radiation to CXR. This contradicts the published literature that suggests that the actual exposure to patients is 0.006, 0.006, 0.127, and 0.833 CXR equivalents of radiation, respectively. Of patients who had undergone an X-ray, 55.9% thought about the issue of radiation prior to the study, whereas 46.1% of those undergoing a CT scan considered radiation prior to the exam. Similarly, 35.2% and 27.6% reported their doctor having discussed radiation with them prior to obtaining an X-ray and CT scan, respectively. Patients greatly overestimate the radiation exposure associated with plain film X-rays and cone-beam CT scans of the foot and ankle, and may benefit from increased counseling regarding the relatively low radiation exposure associated with these imaging modalities. Level of Evidence: Level III: Prospective questionnaire

Requesting physicians’ knowledge of X-radiation exposure from computed tomography scan examinations: A case study of two Nigerian tertiary hospitals

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Samson O. Paulinus ◽  
Benjamin E. Udoh ◽  
Bassey E. Archibong ◽  
Akpama E. Egong ◽  
Akwa E. Erim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Tertiary Hospitals ◽  
Medical Exposure

Objective: Physicians who often request for computed tomography (CT) scan examinations are expected to have sound knowledge of radiation exposure (risks) to patients in line with the basic radiation protection principles according to the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the Protection of Persons Undergoing Medical Exposure or Treatment (POPUMET), and the Ionizing Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (IR(ME)R). The aim is to assess the level of requesting physicians’ knowledge of ionizing radiation from CT scan examinations in two Nigerian tertiary hospitals. Materials and Methods: An 18-item-based questionnaire was distributed to 141 practicing medical doctors, excluding radiologists with work experience from 0 to >16 years in two major teaching hospitals in Nigeria with a return rate of 69%, using a voluntary sampling technique. Results: The results showed that 25% of the respondents identified CT thorax, abdomen, and pelvis examination as having the highest radiation risk, while 22% said that it was a conventional chest X-ray. Furthermore, 14% concluded that CT head had the highest risk while 9% gave their answer to be conventional abdominal X-ray. In addition, 17% inferred that magnetic resonance imaging had the highest radiation risk while 11% had no idea. Furthermore, 25.5% of the respondents have had training on ionizing radiation from CT scan examinations while 74.5% had no training. Majority (90%) of the respondents were not aware of the ICRP guidelines for requesting investigations with very little (<3%) or no knowledge (0%) on the POPUMET and the IR(ME)R respectively. Conclusion: There is low level of knowledge of ionizing radiation from CT scan examinations among requesting physicians in the study locations.

scholarly journals A Comparative Systematic Literature Review on Knee Bone Reports from MRI, X-Rays and CT Scans Using Deep Learning and Machine Learning Methodologies

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hafsa Khalid ◽  
Muzammil Hussain ◽  
Mohammed A. Al Ghamdi ◽  
Tayyaba Khalid ◽  
Khadija Khalid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Deep Learning ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Machine Learning Techniques ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
X Rays ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Learning Techniques

The purpose of this research was to provide a “systematic literature review” of knee bone reports that are obtained by MRI, CT scans, and X-rays by using deep learning and machine learning techniques by comparing different approaches—to perform a comprehensive study on the deep learning and machine learning methodologies to diagnose knee bone diseases by detecting symptoms from X-ray, CT scan, and MRI images. This study will help those researchers who want to conduct research in the knee bone field. A comparative systematic literature review was conducted for the accomplishment of our work. A total of 32 papers were reviewed in this research. Six papers consist of X-rays of knee bone with deep learning methodologies, five papers cover the MRI of knee bone using deep learning approaches, and another five papers cover CT scans of knee bone with deep learning techniques. Another 16 papers cover the machine learning techniques for evaluating CT scans, X-rays, and MRIs of knee bone. This research compares the deep learning methodologies for CT scan, MRI, and X-ray reports on knee bone, comparing the accuracy of each technique, which can be used for future development. In the future, this research will be enhanced by comparing X-ray, CT-scan, and MRI reports of knee bone with information retrieval and big data techniques. The results show that deep learning techniques are best for X-ray, MRI, and CT scan images of the knee bone to diagnose diseases.

scholarly journals Dose Estimation by Geant4-Based Simulations for Cone-Beam CT Applications: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (13) ◽  
pp. 6136
Author(s):  
Ana M. Cabanas ◽  
Mauricio Arriagada-Benítez ◽  
Carlos Ubeda ◽  
Oliver Meseguer-Ruiz ◽  
Pedro Arce
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Cone Beam Ct ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Dose Estimation ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Published Evidence ◽  
Meta Analyses

The last two decades have witnessed increasing use of X-ray imaging and, hence, the exposure of humans to potentially harmful ionizing radiation. Computed tomography accounts for the largest portion of medically-related X-ray exposure. Accurate knowledge of ionizing radiation dose from Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) imaging is of great importance to estimate radiation risks and justification of imaging exposures. This work aimed to review the published evidence on CBCT dose estimation by focusing on studies that employ Geant4-based toolkits to estimate radiation dosage. A systematic review based on a scientometrics approach was conducted retrospectively, from January 2021, for a comprehensive overview of the trend, thematic focus, and scientific production in this topic. The search was conducted using WOS, PubMed, and Scopus databases, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. In total, 93 unique papers were found, of which only 34 met the inclusion criteria. We opine that the findings of this study provides a basis to develop accurate simulations of CBCT equipment for optimizing the trade-off between clinical benefit and radiation risk.

scholarly journals Measurement of Tibial Tuberosity–Trochlear Groove Offset Distance by Weightbearing Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Scan

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 232596711773415 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Marzo ◽  
Melissa A. Kluczynski ◽  
Anthony Notino ◽  
Leslie J. Bisson
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Cone Beam Ct ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Trochlear Groove ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Offset Distance ◽  
History Of ◽  
Conventional Ct

Background: Computed tomography (CT) scans are useful for objectively measuring bone alignment because they show bone detail particularly well, and these scans have been used extensively to assess patellar orientation. The tibial tubercle–trochlear groove (TT-TG) offset distance has been shown to be influenced by knee flexion and weightbearing, yet conventional CT scans are obtained with the subject relaxed, supine, and with the knee in full extension. A new cone-beam CT scanner has been designed to allow for weightbearing images, potentially providing a more physiologically relevant assessment of patellofemoral alignment. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to measure the TT-TG offset in healthy individuals without any history of knee complaints when CT scans were obtained while fully weightbearing on a flexed knee. Our hypothesis was that the TT-TG offset measurement in these healthy knees would be reproducible and less than the historically reported normal range. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Twenty healthy volunteers without any history of knee complaint were recruited to undergo a weightbearing cone-beam CT scan of the knee flexed at 30°. The scans were reviewed by a radiologist and an orthopaedic surgeon, and TT-TG offset was measured using the digital tools of a picture archiving and communication system. Paired t tests were used to compare TT-TG offset on 2 separate occasions for both raters. Inter- and intrarater reliability were assessed using a 2-way mixed-effects model intraclass correlation coefficient with corresponding 95% confidence intervals for TT-TG offset. Results: The mean TT-TG offset was 2.7 mm. There were no statistically significant differences in TT-TG offset between raters ( Prater1 = .70; Prater2 = .49) and time of read ( Ptime1 = .83; Ptime2 = .19). Good to moderate interrater reliability was found at the time of both reads, and good intrarater reliability was found for both raters. Conclusion: When measured by CT scan and obtained from a subject while weightbearing on a flexed knee, the TT-TG offset is reproducible and the distance is less than that obtained via a conventional CT scan.

scholarly journals Physician’s Knowledge on X-ray Exposure from CT Scans in a Moroccan Hospital

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Bouchra Amaoui ◽  
Abdennasser El Kharras ◽  
Slimane Semghouli
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Health Risks ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Potential Health ◽  
X Ray

Background: Computed tomography (CT) is a major source of ionizing radiation exposure in medical diagnostic.  Patients more exposed related to radiation are supposed to be more susceptible to health risks. Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess physician’s knowledge of radiation doses and potential health risks of radiation exposure from CT. Materials and Methods: A standardized questionnaire was distributed to physicians. The questionnaire covered the demographic data of the prescriber, the frequency of referrals for CT scan examinations, the physicians’ knowledge of radiation doses, the potential health risks of radiation exposure from CT scan and training on patients’ radiation   protection. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Microsoft Office Excel 2007. Results: A total of 72 physicians (55%) completed the questionnaire. Ninety nine percent of the practitioners’ prescribe CT examinations for patients during their exercises but only 10% of physicians use the guideline during CT prescriptions. Thirty eight percent of prescribers took into account the ratio benefit/risk related to x-rays during radiological exam prescription. While 4% of prescribers’ explained the risk related to x-rays to the patients during radiological exam prescription, 14% of physicians have correctly estimated the effective dose received during an abdomen pelvic scan compared to the dose of a standard chest x-ray radiograph in an adult.  Fifty four percent of doctors underestimated the lifetime risk of fatal cancer attributable to a single computed tomography scan of the abdomen pelvic and 8% of practitioners have received formal training on risks to patients from radiation exposure. Conclusion: The present study showed the limited knowledge of radiation exposure for the Physicians. Recurrent training in advanced radiation protection of patients could lead to significant improvements in knowledge and practice of CT prescribers.

scholarly journals Is Obtaining a Computed Tomography Prior to Offering Anterior Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (ACDA) Necessary? The Results of Surgeons Predicting ACDA Candidacy From Magnetic Resonance Imagings and X-Rays Alone

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph A Osorio ◽  
Griffin R Baum ◽  
Simon Morr ◽  
Richard P Menger ◽  
Patrick Reid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Cervical Surgery

Abstract INTRODUCTION Moderate/severe cervical spondylosis, and the presence of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) are contraindications to anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA). Although computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for identifying these conditions, some surgeons proceed with ACDA surgery with only an magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and plain radiographs. We sought to determine if an X-ray and MRI alone were adequate for assessing bridging osteophytes and OPLL, when considering ACDA candidates. METHODS A total of 121 cervical levels in 86 consecutive anterior cervical surgery candidates were included. None had prior cervical surgery, all were being considered for ADCA prior to obtaining a CT scan, and all were being considered for 1 to 2 levels of pathology. A total of 10 spine surgeons rated X-rays and MRIs to determine if the patients were suitable candidates for ACDA. Analysis was performed using Fleiss’ Kappa and sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS A total of 86 patients were included, CT scans changed the initial planned arthroplasty (ACDA) to fusion (ACDF) in 17% of cases (15 of 86) because of contraindications that included significant bridging osteophytes and/or OPLL. A total of 10 surgeons rated scans from 86 patients over 2 separate sessions using X-ray and MRIs. Intrarater reliability (k = 0.44), and inter-rater reliability (k = 0.24) demonstrated weak predictability in identifying which patients would be found on CT to have significant bridging osteophytes and/or OPLL. Raters were found to have diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 69.59% and 52.51% respectively. An ACDA candidate was rated by a majority of surgeon raters for ACDA, although the CT scan found OPLL vs retrovertebral osteophyte, making this a contraindication to ACDA. CONCLUSION CT scans changed operative management in 17% of ACDA-planned cases. Spine surgeon assessments of X-ray and MRIs alone for ACDA were highly unreliable with significantly weak intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, further emphasizing the need for obtaining CT scans on all ACDA candidates.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document