Measuring radiation exposure during percutaneous drainages: can shoulder dosemeters be used to estimate finger doses?
- 1 November 1992
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in The British Journal of Radiology
- Vol. 65 (779) , 1007-1010
- https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-65-779-1007
Abstract
Some previous studies have shown remarkably high finger doses to radiologists performing percutaneous drainage under fluoroscopy. To assess the possible need for extra finger dosemeters in addition to the general dosemeter, radiologists' and assistants' radiation exposure at both shoulders and at the third fingers of both hands were recorded using thermoluminescent dosemeters during 27 interventional drainage procedures. Under couch screening was used. Mean dose rates were calculated by dividing the doses by the screening time. The dose rates for the sites measured were correlated with each other. The radiologists' bilateral finger dose rates did not correlate with each other; nor did dose rates between the left shoulder and the right hand. The radiologists' dose rates at both shoulders, however, correlated with each other, as did the shoulder dose rates with the dose rates at the ispilateral hand. The right shoulder dose rates correlated with the left hand dose rates. The assistants' dose rates at the places of measurement all showed significant correlations with each other. It is therefore concluded that radiologists involved in percutaneous drainages should use finger dosemeters on both hands; for assistants this may not be necessary.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- Extremity doses during interventional radiologyClinical Radiology, 1990
- Radiation Safety during Percutaneous NephrolithotomyBritish Journal of Urology, 1989
- Radiation Dose to Patients and Personnel during Fluoroscopy at Percutaneous Renal Stone ExtractionActa Radiologica, 1989
- Doses to head and arms of radiologists during fluoroscopyThe British Journal of Radiology, 1985
- Personnel exposure to radiation at some angiographic procedures.Radiology, 1981