scholarly journals Analisis Dosis Paparan Radiasi Pada General X-Ray II Di Instalasi Radiologi Rumah Sakit Muhammadiyah Semarang

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 96-102
Author(s):  
Ida Septiyanti ◽  
M. Ardhi Khalif ◽  
Edi Daenur Anwar
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Distribution Pattern ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Radiation Source ◽  
Waiting Room ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Ion Chamber ◽  
Radiation Distribution ◽  
Exposure Distribution

Background: This study analyzes the Radiation Dose of the General X-ray Radiology Installation at Roemani Hospital  Muhammadiyah Semarang to determine the dose received by the radiographer, the community around the room and to know the value of the effectiveness of radiation protection and to determine the pattern of radiation exposure distribution in the general X-ray radiology installation room II.Methods: Measurements were taken during general X-ray exposure and without exposure using a 451P ion chamber survey. Measurement of dose data received by the radiographer and the community around the room is taken at the point of the operator’s room, service room, waiting room. As for the measurement of the effectiveness of radiation protection taken at the point in the operator’s room and the general X-ray II and the radiation distribution pattern taken at points A, B, C, D and E with a distance of 40 cm, 80 cm and 120 cm in the room general X-ray II.Result: The result of measurements in the operator room are 0.0354 µSv / hour, waiting rooms with a distance of 3.5 m at 0.0146 µSv / hour, in the service room and waiting room with a distance of 8 m at 0 µSv / hour. The value of the effectiveness of radiation protection in the operator station is 83.33% and the general X-ray II door is 84.09%.Conclusions: Based on the results of the data obtained the value of the dose received and the value of effectiveness is quite safe from excessive radiation exposure. The radiation distribution pattern, the farther the distance from the radiation source, the measured radiation exposure value will be lower. 

EVALUATION OF RADIATION DOSE IN DIFFERENT POSITIONS AROUND THE PATIENT TABLE DURING INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY PROJECTIONS

2019 ◽  
Vol 188 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-204
Author(s):  
Y Lahfi ◽  
A Ismail
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Dose Rate ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Interventional Cardiology ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Patient Table ◽  
The Right

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.

IMPACT OF THE TABLE HEIGHT AND THE OPERATOR’S HEIGHT ON THE LEVEL OF RADIATION DELIVERED TO INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGISTS

2019 ◽  
Vol 187 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Faroux ◽  
Thierry Blanpain ◽  
Anthony Fernandez ◽  
Pierre Nazeyrollas ◽  
Sophie Tassan-Mangina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Maximum Distance ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Coronary Interventions ◽  
Coronary Procedures ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Interventional cardiologists count among the health professionals that are most exposed to ionising radiation. To minimise exposure, it is recommended that the patient be placed at the maximum distance possible from the X-ray source, but this recommendation has not been clinically validated. We aimed to investigate the impact of the average table height on the level of radiation delivered to cardiologists performing coronary interventions. The population for analysis included all invasive coronary procedures performed in our centre from March to June 2017. The primary endpoint was operator radiation exposure, as assessed using personal electronic dosimeters located on the operator’s left arm. In total, 225 invasive coronary procedures were analysed. When the average table height was 1126 mm or more, the operators received a radiation dose that was, on average, 53% lower than when the table was lower than 1126 mm. This reduction remained significant by multivariate analysis adjusted for the operator.

scholarly journals KOMBINASI PENAMBAHAN SHIELDING TIMBAL MESIN FLUOROSCOPY BAGASI DAN PENGATURAN JARAK PEKERJA TERHADAP SUMBER RADIASI MENURUNKAN PAPARAN RADIASI SINAR X DAN KELELAHAN MATA PADA PEKERJA SCREENING DI BANDARA INTERNASIONAL X

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maghfirotul Iffah ◽  
I Putu Gede Adiatmika ◽  
I Wayan Bandem Adnyana ◽  
I Dewa Putu Sutjana ◽  
I Made Muliarta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Source ◽  
Additional Treatment ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Control Group Design ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Lead Shielding ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Working Distance

Screening is ordinary process airport passanger was machine baggage. X-ray radiation gives impact to eye because eye sensitive of radiation. Many kinds of eye strain symptom got by screening worker such eye poignant. It is neressary to give  intervention to decrease the radiation exposure and eye strain for worker by increasing lead shielding on the fluoroscopy machine baggage and setting of worker distance toward the source of radiation.             Experimental research with pre-post test control group design. A sampel of 30 people were taken with a simple randomized method which was subdivided into group 1 as a control group without the additional treatment of lead shielding and working distance regulation of the radiation source, group 2 with the addition of a shielding and setting distance as far as 2 m. the study was conducted in August 2017. The variables evaluated were exposure to the received radiation of workes and the strain of the workers eyes.             The result of the research is a combination of  lead shielding on machine baggage fluoroscopy and setting of working distance to X ray source at X International Ariport significantly (p<0,05) in decreasing radiation exposure received by worker equal to 74,59% and worker eye strain 68,85% for a distance of 1,5 m and decreased radiation exposure to the workers as much as 93, 69% and the eye strain on the worker 89,79% at a distance of 2 m from the radiation source.             Concluded that the combination of increasing lead shielding and the setting of worker distance toward the source of radiation decrease thr radiation exposure and eye strain on the screening worker at X International airport.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Ionizing Radiation in Five Private Radiology Centers in Khuzestan

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behzad Fouladi Dehaghi ◽  
Jamileh Deris ◽  
Maryam Mosavi Qahfarokhi ◽  
Ameneh Golbaghi ◽  
Leila Nematpour
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Gamma Spectroscopy ◽  
Surface Radiation ◽  
Annual Dose ◽  
Waiting Room ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Medicine Research ◽  
Ionization Radiation ◽  
Diagnostic Radiography

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.

Radiation physics, biology, and protection

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikant Sabharwal ◽  
Parthiban Arumugam ◽  
Andrew Kelion
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Cardiology ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Biological Effects ◽  
Radioactive Decay ◽  
Radiation Physics ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Practical Applications ◽  
Radioactive Substances

This chapter explains the basics of radiation physics, including an explanatory section on atoms and nuclei, and detail on radioactive decay including statistics. The interaction of X-ray and gamma photons with matter is also explained. Detail is provided on radiation exposure, including acute and late biological effects, and the principles and practical applications of radiation protection. A section on key UK legislation relevant to nuclear cardiology lists important medicines regulations and acts relating to radioactive substances.

The radiation doses and radiation protection on the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures

2021 ◽  
pp. 20210399
Author(s):  
Mamoru Takenaka ◽  
Makoto Hosono ◽  
Shiro Hayashi ◽  
Tsutomu Nishida ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Average Dose ◽  
Endoscopic Retrograde ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Endoscopic Procedures ◽  
Dose Area Product ◽  
Therapeutic Ercp

Although many interventions involving radiation exposure have been replaced to endoscopic procedure in the gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary fields, there remains no alternative for enteroscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which requires the use of radiation. In this review, we discuss the radiation doses and protective measures of endoscopic procedures, especially for ERCP. For the patient radiation dose, the average dose area product for diagnostic ERCP was 14–26 Gy.cm², while it increased to as high as 67–89 Gy.cm² for therapeutic ERCP. The corresponding entrance skin doses for diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP were 90 and 250 mGy, respectively. The mean effective doses were 3– 6 mSv for diagnostic ERCP and 12–20 mSv for therapeutic ERCP. For the occupational radiation dose, the typical doses were 94 μGy and 75 μGy for the eye and neck, respectively. However, with an over-couch-type X-ray unit, the eye and neck doses reached as high as 550 and 450 μGy, with maximal doses of up to 2.8 and 2.4 mGy/procedure, respectively. A protective lead shield was effective for an over couch X-ray tube unit. It lowered scattered radiation by up to 89.1% in a phantom study. In actual measurements, the radiation exposure of the endoscopist closest to the unit was reduced to approximately 12%. In conclusion, there is a clear need for raising awareness among medical personnel involved endoscopic procedures to minimise radiation risks to both the patients and staff.

scholarly journals A Study on Some Physical Parameters Related to Image Quality and Radiation Safety in Diagnostic Radiology

2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-17
Author(s):  
Mahfuza Begum ◽  
AS Mollah ◽  
MA Zaman ◽  
M Haq ◽  
AKM Mizanur Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Exposure Time ◽  
Radiation Safety ◽  
Control Panel ◽  
Physical Parameters ◽  
Output Radiation ◽  
Tube Voltage ◽  
Waiting Room ◽  
X Ray

Different essential radiographic parameters were studied in order to assess radiographic image quality ensuring reduction of radiation exposure in some diagnostic X-ray facilities of Bangladesh. Different parameters for developing and fixing liquid were investigated in order to eliminate improper film processing techniques. General information about intensifying screen, radiography and mammography film was also collected. X-ray tube voltage, output radiation dose and exposure time for diagnostic X-ray machines were tested to achieve significant dose reduction without loss of diagnostic information. It is found that output radiation dose varies in different diagnostic X-ray installations. 70% X-ray installations achieve the recommended value for tube voltage while 87.5% measure the exposure time appropriately. Radiation dose level at patient waiting room, dark room and around control panel was also measured. About 92.5, 85 and 77.5% installations show their results within the acceptance limit at these positions respectively which provide radiation safety for patients, workers and public in diagnostic radiology.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/jbas.v35i1.7967Journal of Bangladesh Academy of Sciences, Vol.35, No.1, 7-17, 2011

scholarly journals Radiation protection x-ray in the diagnostic radiology unit kasih ibu kedonganan hospital

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
I Ketut Putra ◽  
Ida Bagus Made Suryatika ◽  
I Gusti Agung Ayu Ratnawati ◽  
Gusti Ngurah Sutapa
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
General Public ◽  
Radiation Safety ◽  
Primary Wall ◽  
Dose Limit ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Limit Value ◽  
Room Design ◽  
Radiation Workers

One source of radiation is X-ray aircraft, which utilization must pay attention to safety aspects. Room design is the first step that must be done before the operation of X-ray aircraft. Radiology Unit Kasih Ibu Kedonganan Hospital operates an X-ray aircraft with specifications of 250 kV-85 mA, needs to be tested for radiation exposure which is an integral part of the verification of radiation protection. Test for radiation exposure at least once a year. The purpose of the installation room design is to ensure that workers or the general public around the plant receive radiation exposure that is smaller than the applicable dose limit value (DLV), by the radiation safety provisions that refer to the Decree. BAPETEN No. 7 of 2009 concerning Radiation Safety in the use of radiographic equipment. This study will test exposure to room wall shields associated with radiation workers and the general public. The results showed that all walls A, B, C, D, and E could still completely weaken the rate of X-ray radiation. The highest radiation dose detected on wall B is the primary wall for the Buky stand examination.

Excellence is the Real Enemy of Practicality! Relevance to Radiation Countermeasure Development

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 242
Author(s):  
Raj Kumar ◽  
A.K. Singh
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Dose Rate ◽  
Protective Efficacy ◽  
Experimental Models ◽  
Radiation Dose Rate ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Human Volunteers ◽  
Γ Rays ◽  
Radio Sensitivity

<p>Radiation countermeasures development was undertaken almost six decade ago at AFRRI, USA with the aim to protect military as well as civilian personals against accidental or deliberate radiation exposure. Later on, with the advancement of radiation technologies and exploration of X-ray or γ-rays for diagnostics and therapeutic purposes, probability of radiation exposure was enhanced multifold. Therefore, importance of radiation countermeasures development was recognised globally. However, despite the concentrated efforts, till date not a single FDA approved radio protective drug is available for emergency uses. Major impediments identified in this are included variability in radio protective efficacy with different experimental models, radiation dose rate, radiation types and differential radio sensitivity of various biological systems. No way to evaluate radio protective efficacy of an agent in human volunteers. It is sufficient to realise that uniform excellence may not be achieved in the area of radiation countermeasure development. However, practical excellence based on the radioprotector’s application scenario can be achieved. Different radiation accidental scenarios and feasible practical parameters of excellence for radiation countermeasure development for particular types of incidental, accidental or deliberated radiation exposure are described.</p>

β-radiation exposure with 188Re-labelled pharmaceuticals

2005 ◽  
Vol 44 (03) ◽  
pp. 94-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Wunderlich ◽  
K. Behge ◽  
Th. Schönmuth ◽  
J. Kotzerke ◽  
M. Andreeff
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Dose Rate ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Working Conditions ◽  
Middle Finger ◽  
Beta Radiation ◽  
High Radiation ◽  
Days Of Therapy

SummaryAim: The number of therapies with radiopharmaceuticals labelled with 188Re is increasing requiring the documentation of the beta radiation exposure Hp(0.07) of the staff at all working and production sites and during the application and follow-up of the patient according to the new German Radiation Protection Law (StrlSchV). However, data for β-radiation exposure are rare. Therefore, we determined the personal dose Hp(0.07) of the skin of the hands handling 188Re radiopharmaceuticals to identify steps of high radiation exposure and to optimize working conditions. Method: Thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLD 100) were fixed to the fingertips of the radiochemist, the physician and the nurse and compared to official ring dosimeters. In addition, to monitor radiation exposure continuously readable electronic beta- and gamma dosimeters EPD (Siemens) were used. At eight days in which therapies were performed these readings were evaluated. Results: Considering one therapy with a 188Re-labelled radiopharmaceutical the middle finger of the radiochemist (production) and the physician (application) showed a radiation burden of 894 and 664 μSv/GBq, respectively. The cumulative dose of the fingertips after eight days of therapy was 249 and 110 mSv for the radiochemist and physician, respectively. A cumulative finger dose after eight days of therapy of 17 and 38 μSv/GBq was found for physician and nurse leading to a Hp(0.07) of 3 and 6 mSv, respectively. Preparing the radiopharmaceutical labelled with 20GBq of 188Re the reading of the personal electronic dosimeter of the radiochemist showed a γ-dose rate H . p(10) of 55 μSv/h and a β-dose rate H . p(0.07) of 663 μSv/h which are obviously not representative for the true radiation dose to the skin of the fingertips. Conclusion: During therapy with 188Re-labelled radiopharmaceuticals the true radiation dose to the skin of the finger tips exceeds by far the readings of the official ring dosimeters as well as the continuously readable beta- and gamma dosimeters. This means a risk in exceeding the radiation limit of 500 mSv/a given in the German Radiation Protection Law (§55 StrSchV) primarily in the working field of the radiochemist and the administering physician.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document