Assessment of dosimetric approaches in evaluating radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists in Sri Lanka.

IF 1.7 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Radiological Physics and Technology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-19 DOI:10.1007/s12194-023-00774-7
Sachini Udara Wickramasinghe, Vijitha Ramanathan, Sivananthan Sarasanandarajah
{"title":"Assessment of dosimetric approaches in evaluating radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists in Sri Lanka.","authors":"Sachini Udara Wickramasinghe, Vijitha Ramanathan, Sivananthan Sarasanandarajah","doi":"10.1007/s12194-023-00774-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interventional cardiologists face significant radiation exposure during interventional cardiology procedures. Therefore, this study focuses on assessing radiation exposure among interventional cardiologists during their procedures. Specifically, it aims to determine the effectiveness of both single and double dosimeter methods in estimating annual occupational radiation doses. This research holds pioneering significance as it represents the very first study undertaken in Sri Lanka. Thirteen interventional cardiologists performed 486 interventional cardiology procedures over three months in three different healthcare institutes. Active Hp(10) dosimeters were placed to measure radiation exposure. Effective doses were calculated using single and double dosimetric algorithms. Annual occupational doses were assessed on an operator basis. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess algorithmic differences and dose variations using the Kruskal-Wallis test and linear regression. The highest annual occupational dose for each dosimetric algorithm received as 2.00 ± 0.24 mSv, 2.29 ± 0.48 mSv, 3.35 ± 0.71 mSv, and 2.64 ± 0.42 mSv, respectively, and remained below the recommended safety limit of 20 mSv/year. The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no significant differences in the effective doses among double dosimetric algorithms, as well as between single and double dosimetric algorithms (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed strong correlations among various algorithms, demonstrating consistency. The findings of this study hold significant effects on interventional cardiology practice in Sri Lanka, enhancing radiation safety and monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiological Physics and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00774-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interventional cardiologists face significant radiation exposure during interventional cardiology procedures. Therefore, this study focuses on assessing radiation exposure among interventional cardiologists during their procedures. Specifically, it aims to determine the effectiveness of both single and double dosimeter methods in estimating annual occupational radiation doses. This research holds pioneering significance as it represents the very first study undertaken in Sri Lanka. Thirteen interventional cardiologists performed 486 interventional cardiology procedures over three months in three different healthcare institutes. Active Hp(10) dosimeters were placed to measure radiation exposure. Effective doses were calculated using single and double dosimetric algorithms. Annual occupational doses were assessed on an operator basis. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess algorithmic differences and dose variations using the Kruskal-Wallis test and linear regression. The highest annual occupational dose for each dosimetric algorithm received as 2.00 ± 0.24 mSv, 2.29 ± 0.48 mSv, 3.35 ± 0.71 mSv, and 2.64 ± 0.42 mSv, respectively, and remained below the recommended safety limit of 20 mSv/year. The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no significant differences in the effective doses among double dosimetric algorithms, as well as between single and double dosimetric algorithms (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed strong correlations among various algorithms, demonstrating consistency. The findings of this study hold significant effects on interventional cardiology practice in Sri Lanka, enhancing radiation safety and monitoring.

评估斯里兰卡介入心脏病学家辐射暴露的剂量测量方法。
介入心脏病学家在介入心脏病学手术过程中面临大量辐射照射。因此,本研究重点评估介入心脏病学家在手术过程中的辐射暴露。具体来说,研究旨在确定单剂量计和双剂量计方法在估算年度职业辐射剂量方面的有效性。这项研究具有开创性意义,因为它是在斯里兰卡进行的首次研究。13 名介入心脏病学家在三个不同的医疗机构进行了 486 次介入心脏病学手术,历时三个月。他们放置了有源 Hp(10) 剂量计来测量辐射照射。使用单剂量和双剂量算法计算有效剂量。每年的职业剂量以操作者为基础进行评估。采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验和线性回归进行统计分析,以评估算法差异和剂量变化。每种剂量测定算法收到的最高年职业剂量分别为 2.00 ± 0.24 毫西弗特、2.29 ± 0.48 毫西弗特、3.35 ± 0.71 毫西弗特和 2.64 ± 0.42 毫西弗特,仍低于 20 毫西弗特/年的建议安全限值。Kruskal-Wallis 检验表明,双剂量测定算法之间以及单剂量测定算法和双剂量测定算法之间的有效剂量没有显著差异(p > 0.05)。线性回归结果表明,各种算法之间具有很强的相关性,显示出一致性。这项研究的结果对斯里兰卡的介入心脏病学实践具有重大影响,可加强辐射安全和监测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Radiological Physics and Technology
Radiological Physics and Technology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The purpose of the journal Radiological Physics and Technology is to provide a forum for sharing new knowledge related to research and development in radiological science and technology, including medical physics and radiological technology in diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, and radiation therapy among many other radiological disciplines, as well as to contribute to progress and improvement in medical practice and patient health care.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信