• Korean Journal of Digital Imaging in Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.21-26
• /
• 2009

In operation room, the use of the C-arm unit is increasing. So, the radiation dose of the person who work in operation room was even more increased than before. Thus, this study is shown the measurement of expose dose and the way for decrease of the radiation dose by using the C-arm unit. The experiment was performed with the C-arm unit and used a phantom which is similar to tissue of the human body and fluoro-glass dosimeter for dose measurement. The expose dose were measured by the tube position(over tube, under tube) of the C-arm unit, distance(50, 100$\sim$200cm), direction(I, II, III, IV), runtime(1min, 3min), wearing of the apron. The radiation dose was decreased twice and three times at under tube rather than over tube. The I direction was measured 20$\sim$30% more than the others. The biggest expose dose is 50cm from center on distance. The expose dose is decreased to far from center. In case of Wearing of the apron, the radiation dose was decreased 60$\sim$90% by the distance. But there weren't change of the radiation dose by C-arm tube position. In present, by increasing the usage of the C-arm unit, the radiation dose is inevitable. So, this study recommends us to use the under tube of the C-arm unit. Also, Wearing of the apron is required for minimum of the radiation exposure.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.244-250
• /
• 2012

The results of analyzing the difference between performances of individual dosimeters on this research subjecting the PLD and TLD, which are the official personal dosimeters, through dosimetry are as follows. After scanning the integral dose using an automatic scanner, the values of two devices that went through dose adjustment process had a statistical difference in TLD and PLD measurements under each filming conditions which were 70kVp, 200mA, 0.012sec and 42kVp, 100mA, and 0.012sec (p<0.001 and p<0.001 respectively). As for the difference of measurement value between DAP and the two particles under 70kVp, 200mA, 0.012sec filming condition, TLD had a value lower than DAP average value by $44.2mGy{\cdot}cm^2$ and PLD had a value of $246.8mGy{\cdot}cm^2$ which was lower than DAP average value by $15.5mGy{\cdot}cm^2$, while under 42kVp, 100mA, 0.012sec filming condition, TLD had a value lower than DAP average value by $17.9mGy{\cdot}cm^2$ and PLD had a value of $82.6mGy{\cdot}cm^2$ which was lower than DAP average value by 7.6$mGy{\cdot}cm^2$. Also, compared to PLD, each of 10 devices measured dose value in TLD had a larger deviation between the particles, and for a reproducibility test which repeatedly measured one particle, PLD had ${\pm}1%$ which was lower than TLD's ${\pm}2%$. As such, PLD had a superior performance result in dose measurement capacities aspect compared to TLD, and therefore we could verify that PLD is more appropriate and advantageous in managing radiation-related task performing worker's personal radiation exposure management in the diagnostic radiation field.