Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2013.26.2.142

The Survey about the Degree of Damage of Radiation-Protective Shields in Operation Room  

Ryu, Jae Sung (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
Baek, Seung Woo (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
Jung, Cheol Hee (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
Cho, Suk Ju (Jeju National University Hospital)
Jung, Eu Gene (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
Kim, Hae Kyoung (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
Kim, Jae Hun (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
Publication Information
The Korean Journal of Pain / v.26, no.2, 2013 , pp. 142-147 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background: Medical doctors who perform C-arm fluoroscopy-guided procedures are exposed to X-ray radiation. Therefore, radiation-protective shields are recommended to protect these doctors from radiation. For the past several years, these protective shields have sometimes been used without regular inspection. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree of damage to radiation-protective shields in the operating room. Methods: This study investigated 98 radiation-protective shields in the operation rooms of Konkuk University Medical Center and Jeju National University Hospital. We examined whether these shields were damaged or not with the unaided eye and by fluoroscopy. Results: There were seventy-one aprons and twenty-seven thyroid protectors in the two university hospitals. Fourteen aprons (19.7%) were damaged, whereas no thyroid protectors (0%) were. Of the twenty-six aprons, which have been used since 2005, eleven (42.3%) were damaged. Of the ten aprons, which have been used since 2008, none (0%) was damaged. Of the twenty-three aprons that have been used since 2009, two (8.7%) of them were damaged. Of the eight aprons used since 2010, one (12.3%) was damaged. Of the four aprons used since 2011, none (0%) of them were damaged. The most common site of damage to the radiation-protective shields was at the waist of the aprons (51%). Conclusions: As a result, aprons that have been used for a long period of time can have a higher risk of damage. Radiation-protective shields should be inspected regularly and exchanged for new products for the safety of medical workers.
Keywords
fluoroscopy; radiation exposure; radiation-protective shields;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007; 37: 1-332.
2 Miller DL, Vañó E, Bartal G, Balter S, Dixon R, Padovani R, et al. Occupational radiation protection in interventional radiology: a joint guideline of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe and the Society of Interventional Radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010; 21: 607-615.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Singer G. Occupational radiation exposure to the surgeon. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2005; 13: 69-76.   DOI
4 Powys R, Robinson J, Kench PL, Ryan J, Brennan PC. Strict X-ray beam collimation for facial bones examination can increase lens exposure. Br J Radiol 2012; 85: e497-e505.   DOI
5 Cho JH, Kim JY, Kang JE, Park PE, Kim JH, Lim JA, et al. A study to compare the radiation absorbed dose of the C-arm fluoroscopic modes. Korean J Pain 2011; 24: 199-204.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Park PE, Park JM, Kang JE, Cho JH, Cho SJ, Kim JH, et al. Radiation safety and education in the applicants of the final test for the expert of pain medicine. Korean J Pain 2012; 25: 16-21.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Kim TW, Jung JH, Jeon HJ, Yoon KB, Yoon DM. Radiation exposure to physicians during interventional pain procedures. Korean J Pain 2010; 23: 24-27.   DOI
8 Le Heron J, Padovani R, Smith I, Czarwinski R. Radiation protection of medical staff. Eur J Radiol 2010; 76: 20-23.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Tonnessen BH, Pounds L. Radiation physics. J Vasc Surg 2011; 53: 6S-8S.
10 Mroz TE, Yamashita T, Davros WJ, Lieberman IH. Radiation exposure to the surgeon and the patient during kyphoplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008; 21: 96-100.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Cousins C, Sharp C. Medical interventional proceduresreducing the radiation risks. Clin Radiol 2004; 59: 468-473.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Shope TB. Radiation-induced skin injuries from fluoroscopy. Radiographics 1996; 16: 1195-1199.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Schueler BA. Operator shielding: how and why. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2010; 13: 167-171.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Hellawell GO, Mutch SJ, Thevendran G, Wells E, Morgan RJ. Radiation exposure and the urologist: what are the risks? J Urol 2005; 174: 948-952.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Yaffe MJ, Mawdsley GE, Lilley M, Servant R, Reh G. Composite materials for x-ray protection. Health Phys 1991; 60: 661-664.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Poletti JL, McLean D. The effect of source to image-receptor distance on effective dose for some common X-ray projections. Br J Radiol 2005; 78: 810-815.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Botwin KP, Freeman ED, Gruber RD, Torres-Rames FM, Bouchtas CG, Sanelli JT, et al. Radiation exposure to the physician performing fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural steroid injections. Pain Physician 2001; 4: 343-348.
18 Manchikanti L, Cash KA, Moss TL, Pampati V. Radiation exposure to the physician in interventional pain management. Pain Physician 2002; 5: 385-393.