Journal of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회지)

The Korean Society of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A New Radiation-Shielding Device for Restraining Veterinary Patients

  • Songyi Kim (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Minju Lee (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Miju Oh (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Yooyoung Lee (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Jiyoung Ban (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Jiwoon Park (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Sojin Kim (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Uhjin Kim (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Jaepung Han (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Dongwoo Chang (Department of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University)
  • Received : 2023.09.30
  • Accepted : 2023.11.07
  • Published : 2023.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In veterinary medicine, most radiographic images are obtained by restraining patients, inevitably exposing the restrainer to secondary scattered radiation. Radiation exposure can result in stochastic reactions such as cancer and genetic effects, as well as deterministic reactions such as skin burns, cataracts, and bone marrow suppression. Radiation-shielding equipment, including aprons, thyroid shields, eyewear, and gloves, can reduce radiation exposure. However, the risk of radiation exposure to the upper arms, face, and back remains, and lead aprons and thyroid shields are heavy, restricting movement. We designed a new radiation-shielding system and compared its shielding ability with those of conventional radiation-shielding systems. We hypothesized that the new shielding system would have a wider radiation-shielding range and similar shielding ability. The radiation exposure dose differed significantly between the conventional and new shielding systems in the forehead, chin, and bilateral upper arm areas (p < 0.001). When both systems were used together, the radiation-shielding ability was better than when only one system was used at all anatomical locations (p < 0.01). This study suggests that the new radiation-shielding system is essential and convenient for veterinary radiation workers because it is a step closer to radiation safety in veterinary radiography.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion (IITP) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No. 2021-0-00490, Development of Precision Analysis and Imaging Technology for Biological Radio Waves).

References

  1. Andrew S, Abdelmonem MR, Kohli S, Dabke H. Evaluation of back pain and lead apron use among staff at a district general hospital. Cureus 2021; 13: e18859. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.18859
  2. Barber J, McNulty JP. Investigation into scatter radiation dose levels received by a restrainer in small animal radiography. J Small Anim Pract 2012; 53: 578-585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5827.2012.01257.x
  3. Hupe O, Ankerhold U. Determination of the dose to persons assisting when X-radiation is used in medicine, dentistry and veterinary medicine. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2011; 144: 478-481. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncq351
  4. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). ICRP publication 103. The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. ICRP. 2007.
  5. Kang KM, Suh TY, Kim YS, Yun SJ. Convergence analysis of safety management for radiation workers and diagnostic radiation-generator devices of animal hospital in Korea. J Korea Converg Soc 2020; 11: 55-61.
  6. Kim SC, Choi JR, Jeon BK. Physical analysis of the shielding capacity for a lightweight apron designed for shielding low intensity scattering X-rays. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 27721. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep27721
  7. Martinez NE, Van Bladel L. Radiation protection challenges in applications of ionising radiation on animals in veterinary practice. Ann ICRP 2020; 49(1_suppl): 158-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146645320931973
  8. Mayer MN, Koehncke NK, Belotta AF, Cheveldae IT, Waldner CL. Use of personal protective equipment in a radiology room at a veterinary teaching hospital. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2018; 59: 137-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/vru.12583
  9. Meomartino L, Greco A, Di Giancamillo M, Brunetti A, Gnudi G. Imaging techniques in veterinary medicine. Part I: radiography and ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol Open 2021; 8: 100382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2021.100382
  10. Mettler FA. Medical effects and risks of exposure to ionising radiation. J Radiol Prot 2012; 32: N9-N13. https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/32/1/N9
  11. Miller DL, Schauer D. The ALARA principle in medical imaging. Philosophy 2015; 40: 38-40.
  12. Monaco MGL, Carta A, Tamhid T, Porru S. Anti-X apron wearing and musculoskeletal problems among healthcare workers: a systematic scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020; 17: 5877. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165877
  13. Oh H, Sung S, Lim S, Jung Y, Cho Y, Lee K. Restrainer exposure to scatter radiation in practical small animal radiography measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters. Vet Med 2018; 63: 81-86. https://doi.org/10.17221/115/2017-VETMED
  14. Papadopoulos N, Papaefstathiou C, Kaplanis PA, Menikou G, Kokona G, Kaolis D, et al. Comparison of lead-free and conventional X-ray aprons for diagnostic radiology. In: World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering. Munich, Germany. New York: Springer, 2009: 544-546.
  15. Park HH. The evaluation of performance and usability of bismuth, tungsten based shields. J Radiol Sci Technol 2018; 41: 611-616. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2018.41.6.611
  16. Park MH, Kwon DM. Measurement of apron shielding rate for X-ray and gamma-ray. J Radiol Sci Technol 2007; 30: 245-250.
  17. Park S, Kim M, Kim JH. Radiation safety for pain physicians: principles and recommendations. Korean J Pain 2022; 35: 129-139. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2022.35.2.129
  18. Savage C, Seale TM IV, Shaw CJ, Angela BP, Marichal D, Rees CR. Evaluation of a suspended personal radiation protection system vs. conventional apron and shields in clinical interventional procedures. Open J Radiol 2013; 3: 143-151. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2013.33024
  19. Shirangi A, Fritschi L, Holman CD. Prevalence of occupational exposures and protective practices in Australian female veterinarians. Aust Vet J 2007; 85: 32-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-0813.2006.00077.x
  20. Yoon SY. Measurement and evaluation of radiation exposure doses for radiation workers in veterinary hospitals. Gwangju: Nambu University; 2015. [thesis].