IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i24p13131-d700963.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Radiation Protection in Interventional Radiology/Cardiology—Is State-of-the-Art Equipment Used?

Author

Listed:
  • Christiane Behr-Meenen

    (Competence Centre for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Heiner von Boetticher

    (Division for Medical Radiation Physics, Faculty VI: Medicine and Health Sciences, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, 26121 Oldenburg, Germany)

  • Jan Felix Kersten

    (Competence Centre for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Albert Nienhaus

    (Competence Centre for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), 20246 Hamburg, Germany
    Department of Occupational Medicine, Toxic Substances, Health Service Research, German Statuary Institution for Accident Insurance and Prevention for Health and Welfare Services (BGW), 22089 Hamburg, Germany)

Abstract

Interventional radiology/cardiology is one of the fields with the highest radiation doses for workers. For this reason, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) published new recommendations in 2018 to shield staff from radiation. This study sets out to establish the extent to which these recommendations are observed in Germany. For the study, areas were selected which are known to have relatively high radiation exposure along with good conditions for radiological protection—interventional cardiology, radiology and vascular surgery. The study was advertised with the aid of an information flyer which was distributed via organisations including the German Cardiac Society (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Kardiologie- Herz- und Kreislaufforschung e. V.). Everyone who participated in our study received a questionnaire to record their occupational medical history, dosimetry, working practices, existing interventional installations and personal protective equipment. The results were compared with international recommendations, especially those of the ICRP, based on state-of-the-art equipment. A total of 104 respondents from eight German clinics took part in the survey. Four participants had been medically diagnosed with cataracts. None of the participants had previously worn an additional dosimeter over their apron to determine partial-body doses. The interventional installations recommended by the ICRP have not been fitted in all examination rooms and, where they have been put in place, they are not always used consistently. Just 31 participants (36.6%) stated that they “always” wore protective lead glasses or a visor. This study revealed considerable deficits in radiological protection—especially in connection with shielding measures and dosimetric practices pertaining to the head and neck—during a range of interventions. Examination rooms without the recommended interventional installations should be upgraded in the future. According to the principle of dose minimization, there is considerable potential for improving radiation protection. Temporary measurements should be taken over the apron to determine the organ-specific equivalent dose to the lens of the eye and the head.

Suggested Citation

  • Christiane Behr-Meenen & Heiner von Boetticher & Jan Felix Kersten & Albert Nienhaus, 2021. "Radiation Protection in Interventional Radiology/Cardiology—Is State-of-the-Art Equipment Used?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-10, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:13131-:d:700963
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/13131/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/13131/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:13131-:d:700963. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.