• Title/Summary/Keyword: Standardized technology

Search Result 1,052, Processing Time 0.022 seconds

A Review of Personal Radiation Dose per Radiological Technologists Working at General Hospitals (전국 종합병원 방사선사의 개인피폭선량에 대한 고찰)

  • Jung, Hong-Ryang;Lim, Cheong-Hwan;Lee, Man-Koo
    • Journal of radiological science and technology
    • /
    • v.28 no.2
    • /
    • pp.137-144
    • /
    • 2005
  • To find the personal radiation dose of radiological technologists, a survey was conducted to 623 radiological technologists who had been working at 44 general hospitals in Korea's 16 cities and provinces from 1998 to 2002. A total of 2,624 cases about personal radiological dose that were collected were analyzed by region, year and hospital, the results of which look as follows : 1. The average radiation dose per capita by region and year for the 5 years was 1.61 mSv. By region, Daegu showed the highest amount 4.74 mSv, followed by Gangwon 4.65 mSv and Gyeonggi 2.15 mSv. The lowest amount was recorded in Chungbuk 0.91 mSv, Jeju 0.94 mSv and Busan 0.97 mSv in order. By year, 2000 appeared to be the year showing the highest amount of radiation dose 1.80 mSv, followed by 2002 1.77 mSv, 1999 1.55 mSv, 2001 1.50 mSv and 1998 1.36 mSv. 2. In 1998, Gangwon featured the highest amount of radiological dose per capita 3.28 mSv, followed by Gwangju 2.51 mSv and Daejeon 2.25 mSv, while Jeju 0.86mSv and Chungbuk 0.85 mSv belonged to the area where the radiation dose remained less than 1.0 mSv In 1999, Gangwon also topped the list with 5.67 mSv, followed by Daegu with 4.35 mSv and Gyeonggi with 2.48 mSv. In the same year, the radiation dose was kept below 1.0 mSv. in Ulsan 0.98 mSv, Gyeongbuk 0.95 mSv and Jeju 0.91 mSv. 3. In 2000, Gangwon was again at the top of the list with 5.73 mSv. Ulsan turned out to have less than 1.0 mSv of radiation dose in the years 1998 and 1999 consecutively, whereas the amount increased relatively high to 5.20 mSv. Chungbuk remained below the level of 1.0 mSv with 0.79 mSv. 4. In 2001, Daegu recorded the highest amount of radiation dose among those ever analyzed for 5 years with 9.05 mSv, followed by Gangwon with 4.01 mSv. The area with less than 1.0 mSv included Gyeongbuk 0.99 mSv and Jeonbuk 0.92 mSv. In 2002, Gangwon also led the list with 4.65 mSv while Incheon 0.88 mSv, Jeonbuk 0.96 mSv and Jeju 0.68 mSv belonged to the regions with less than 1.0 mSv of radiation dose. 5. By hospital, KMH in Daegu showed the record high amount of average radiation dose during the period of 5 years 6.82 mSv, followed by GAH 5.88 mSv in Gangwon and CAH 3.66 mSv in Seoul. YSH in Jeonnam 0.36 mSv comes first in the order of the hospitals with least amount of radiation dose, followed by GNH in Gyeongnam 0.39 mSv and DKH in Chungnam 0.51 mSv. There is a limit to the present study in that a focus is laid on the radiological technologists who are working at the 3rd referral hospitals which are regarded to be stable in terms of working conditions while radiological technologists who are working at small-sized hospitals are excluded from the survey. Besides, there are also cases in which hospitals with less than 5 years since establishment are included in the survey and the radiological technologists who have worked for less than 5 years at a hospital are also put to survey. We can't exclude the possibility, either, of assumption that the difference of personal average radiological dose by region, hospital and year might be ascribed to the different working conditions and facilities by medical institutions. It seems therefore desirable to develop standardized instruments to measure working environment objectively and to invent device to compare and analyze them by region and hospital more accurately in the future.

  • PDF

The study of MDCT of Radiation dose in the department of Radiology of general hospitals in the local area (일 지역 종합병원 영상의학과 MDCT선량에 대한 연구)

  • Shin, Jung-Sub
    • Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
    • /
    • v.6 no.4
    • /
    • pp.281-290
    • /
    • 2012
  • The difference of radiation dose of MDCT due to different protocols between hospitals was analyzed by CTDI, DLP, the number of Slice and the number of DLP/Slice in 30 cases of the head, the abdomen and the chest that have 10 cases each from MDCT examination of the department of diagnostic imaging of three general hospitals in Gyeongsangbuk-do. The difference of image quality, CTDI, DLP, radiation dose in the eye and radiation dose in thyroid was analyzed after both helical scan and normal scan for head CT were performed because a protocol of head CT is relatively simple and head CT is the most frequent case. Head CT was significantly higher in two-thirds of hospitals compared to A hospital that does not exceed a CTDI diagnostic reference level (IAEA 50mGy, Korea 60mGy) (p<0.001). DLP was higher in one-third of hospitals than a diagnostic reference level of IAEA 1,050mGy.cm and Korea 1,000mGy.cm and two-thirds exceeded the recommendation of Korea and those were significantly higher than A hospital that does not exceed a diagnostic reference level (p<0.001). Abdomen CT showed 119mGy that was higher than a diagnostic reference level of IAEA 25mGy and Korea 20mGy in one-third. DLP in all hospitals was higher that Korea recommendation of 700mGy.cm. Among target hospitals, C hospital showed high radiation dose in all tests because MPR and 3D were of great importance due to low pitch and high Tube Curren. To analyze the difference of radiation dose by scan methods, normal scan and helical scan for head CT of the same patient were performed. In the result, CTDI and DLP of helical CT were higher 63.4% and 93.7% than normal scan (p<0.05, p<0.01). However, normal scan of radiation dose in thyroid was higher 87.26% (p<0.01). Beam of helical CT looked like a bell in the deep part and the marginal part so thyroid was exposed with low radiation dose deviated from central beam. In addition, helical scan used Gantry angle perpendicularly and normal scan used it parallel to the orbitomeatal line. Therefore, radiation dose in thyroid decreased in helical scan. However, a protocol in this study showed higher radiation dose than diagnostic reference level of KFDA. To obey the recommendation of KFDA, low Tube Curren and high pitch were demanded. In this study, the difference of image quality between normal scan and helical scan was not significant. Therefore, a standardized protocol of normal scan was generally used and protective gear for thyroid was needed except a special case. We studied a part of CT cases in the local area. Therefore, the result could not represent the entire cases. However, we confirmed that patient's radiation dose in some cases exceeded the recommendation and the deviation between hospitals was observed. To improve this issue, doctors of diagnostic imaging or technologists of radiology should perform CT by the optimized protocol to decrease a level of CT radiation and also reveal radiation dose for the right to know of patients. However, they had little understanding of the situation. Therefore, the effort of relevant agencies with education program for CT radiation dose, release of radiation dose from CT examination and addition of radiation dose control and open CT contents into evaluation for hospital services and certification, and also the effort of health professionals with the best protocol to realize optimized CT examination.