Radiation Safety Knowledge and Practices: Is the Indian Orthopaedic Community Well-informed?

Comparison of Health Complaints, Occupational Risks, and Occupational Health Practices of Healthcare Workers According to Professions and Departments in the Hospital

BACKGROUND

It is essential to protect the health of healthcare workers who constitute a large part of the workforce worldwide and whose importance has become more evident after the recent pandemic. There are numerous occupational hazards for healthcare workers in hospitals.

PURPOSE

The study aims to assess the exposure hazards of healthcare workers and their health complaints, as well as their awareness, knowledge, opinions, and attitudes towards occupational health and safety (OHS), considering workers' professions and departments in a public hospital. This cross-sectional study conducted a survey among healthcare workers (n=608) who worked at Yozgat City Hospital, Yozgat, Turkey.

RESULTS

The majority of workers were nurses (43.4%, N=264/608). Latex exposure (63.7%, N=387/608) and noise (55.8%, N=339/608) were the most common exposed hazards, and the risk varies depending on their professions and job descriptions. However, the risk perception of workers was priorities of infectious diseases (48.5%, N=292/602) and violence (27.4%, N=165/602). Musculoskeletal system problems (71.9%, n=439/608) were observed very frequently in workers. Additionally, 9.2% (N=56/608) of workers were diagnosed with an occupational disease. The unit and profession most commonly diagnosed with occupational diseases were the laboratory (22.5%, N=9/40) and midwives (19.4%, N=14/72), respectively. The frequency of workers who stated that they had a work accident at least once in their lives was 31.9% (N=194/608), and higher frequencies belonged to nurses, health officers, and midwives. Additionally, the emergency department was the riskier unit. The study conducted relationship analyses between exposure to various occupational agents at different exposure frequencies and various health complaints. The relationships of occupational hazards such as chemotherapeutics, anesthetic gases, aerosol type drugs, sterilization and disinfection agents, xylene, toluene, formaldehyde, and surgical smoke with health complaints such as liver, dermal diseases, respiratory problems, and varicose veins have been determined.

CONCLUSIONS

The hospital workers had a high rate of injuries to sharp objects and musculoskeletal systems. Remarkably, operating rooms and emergency rooms were found to be riskier in terms of work accidents. More than half of healthcare workers may delay using personal protective equipment (PPE) due to excessive workload. Further studies are needed on the effects of more specific occupational chemicals and diseases, such as varicose veins, fertility, and neurological problems. Frequent risk assessments, effective training, workload reduction, and biomarker monitoring are crucial for hospital workplace safety.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices Regarding Radiation and its Hazards Among Orthopaedic Surgeons in India: A Questionnaire-Based Study

Introduction

Orthopaedic surgeons are among the most frequent users of radiation and are often exposed to X-Ray radiation regularly. There is an overall unsatisfactory level of knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding the same among surgeons. This study aimed to assess the practices among orthopaedic surgeons regarding radiation and its hazards in India.

Methodology

This questionnaire-based survey was conducted between March and September 2022. The questionnaire broadly assessed the knowledge, awareness, and practices among orthopaedic surgeons regularly exposed to X-ray radiation. The questionnaire consisted of objective and Likert scale questions which were distributed to the respondents electronically using publicly available contact information. A qualitative review of interpretations obtained from the responses and available evidence in the literature was then performed.

Results

The response rate for the survey was 36.4%. 65.9% reported using trunk protection all the time during procedures. 57.1% of respondents reported not using thyroid protection during procedures. 92.3% reported not using protective goggles and 100% did not use appropriate gloves. 76.9% were not issued dosimeters, and only 5.5% of those who had been issued one wore it during radiation procedures. 58.2% reported having a dedicated employee to operate the machine. 86.8% of respondents did not have formal training and 81.3% were not aware of institutes offering formal training.

Conclusion

There is very high compliance with the use of protection aprons among the respondents however, the use of other apparel like thyroid shields, protection goggles and gloves was poor. The awareness regarding radiation exposure was also poor as most respondents were not issued dosimeters, however, those issued with one were well aware of their exposure. It is imperative to prioritize both surgeons' and patients' safety where radiation exposure is concerned.

Orthopaedic surgeons' knowledge and practice of radiation safety when using fluoroscopy during procedures: A narrative review

OBJECTIVES

The fluoroscopy environment poses a potential occupational radiation exposure risk to theatre personnel. Risks can be mitigated with effective application of radiation protection knowledge and methods. This review aimed to determine the link between orthopaedic surgeon's knowledge and the use of appropriate safety methods when using fluoroscopy.

KEY FINDINGS

A keyword search of three databases discovered six articles, totalling 2209 orthopaedic surgeons, who completed surveys to assess knowledge on various aspects of radiation safety and training. Participants had varying levels of experience. Moreover 1981 participants always wore a lead gown (89 %), while only 1052 participants wore thyroid protection (47 %). 449 participants (20 %) received some form of training.

CONCLUSION

Although surveys asked a range of questions it appeared that there was low knowledge of the ALARP principles. Usage of protective equipment is a legal requirement and thus was observed throughout, however, there were a number of incidences of disregarding some protective measures. Although there appeared to be limited knowledge surrounding radiation protection measures and lack of training provided, no clear link was demonstrated between compliance with protective methods and knowledge of the risks.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Formal and continuous training should be provided for the enhancement of knowledge to ensure the safety of all staff and help prevent the long-term effects of ionising radiation when using fluoroscopy.

Intraoperative Fluoroscopy Radiation Using OEC 9900 Elite C-arm: Risk and Method for Decreasing Exposure

ABSTRACT

The use of intraoperative fluoroscopy in surgery produces scattered radiation that can expose all operating room personnel to measurable and, in some cases, substantial radiation doses. The goal of this work is to assess and document potential radiation doses to various staff positions in a simulated standard operating room environment. Adult-sized mannequins wearing standard lead protective aprons were placed at seven positions around large and small BMI cadavers. Doses were recorded in real time at thyroid level with Bluetooth-enabled dosimeters for a variety of fluoroscope settings and imaging views. A total of 320 images were acquired, resulting in 2,240 dosimeter readings from the seven mannequins. Doses were compared to cumulative air kerma (CAK) calculations provided by the fluoroscope. There was a strong correlation between the CAK and the recorded scattered radiation doses ( P < 0.001). Radiation doses could be reduced by manipulating C-arm manual technique settings [e.g., turning off the automatic exposure control (AEC) and using pulse (PULSE) or low dose (LD) settings]. Staff position and patient size also affected the recorded doses. The highest radiation doses were recorded across all settings for the mannequin positioned immediately adjacent to the C-arm x-ray tube. The larger BMI cadaver generated greater scattered radiation than the smaller BMI cadaver for all views and settings. This work provides suggestions for reducing exposure to operating room personnel beyond standard techniques of reducing beam-on time, increasing the distance from the radiation source, and use of shielding. Simple changes in C-arm settings (turning AEC off, avoiding DS setting, use of PULSE or LD settings) can markedly reduce dose to staff.

Radiation educational program significantly reduces intraoperative fluoroscopy time during locking plate fixation for distal radius fractures

BACKGROUND

The use of C-arm fluoroscopy poses a risk of radiation exposure to the surgeons. This study aimed to examine the intraoperative fluoroscopy time of the distal radius plating before and after radiation educational program.

METHODS

A total of 68 cases (48 women and 20 men; average age, 61.8 years) were reviewed between July 2017 and October 2019. All patients were treated with volar locking plate fixation for distal radius fractures. On October 2018, we had a 1-h radiation educational program for orthopedic surgeons. Intraoperative fluoroscopy time was compared between 34 cases in the preintervention group (group A) and 34 cases in the postintervention group (group B). Radiographic correction loss of the fracture was assessed by ulnar variance (UV), radial inclination (RI), and volar tilt (VT) between immediately after surgery and at the time of bone union.

RESULTS

A significant difference was found in intraoperative fluoroscopy time between 329 s in group A and 123 s in group B. ΔUV between immediately after surgery and at the time of bone union was 0.6 mm in group A and 0.3 mm in group B; ΔRI was -0.3° in group A, -0.1° in group B, ΔVT is -0.4° in group A, and -0.1° in group B. No significant difference was found among them.

CONCLUSIONS

After an educational program on radiation exposure, the intraoperative fluoroscopy time was significantly saved in the plating surgery for the distal radius fractures. The shortening of the intraoperative fluoroscopy time did not affect the loss of radiographic correction of the fractures.

Radiation in orthopaedics (RIO) study: a national survey of UK orthopaedic surgeons

OBJECTIVES

Orthopaedic surgeons have a responsibility to minimise risks of ionising radiation to patients, themselves and staff. This study aims to establish the understanding of radiation practice, legislation and risk by orthopaedic surgeons.

METHODS

A nationwide online survey of UK-based orthopaedic surgeons was conducted. Participants answered 18 multiple-choice questions assessing level of radiation safety training, basic principles/knowledge of ionising radiation, relevant legislation and operating practice.

RESULTS

A total of 406 surgeons completed the survey. 92% reported using intraoperative ionising radiation at least once per week. 38% received no formal training on radiation safety. Knowledge of basic principles of radiation and legislation was limited. There was variable knowledge when labelling an image intensifier machine and choosing its safest orientation. Poor uptake of radiation protection equipment was noted. Only 19% agreed they had adequate training in ionising radiation safety and 27% reported receiving adequate training in equipment emitting ionising radiation in the operating theatre.

CONCLUSION

Many orthopaedic surgeons in the UK do not believe they are adequately trained in radiation safety. There is a deficiency amongst practicing surgeons in basic knowledge, relevant legislation and practicalities of the use of ionising radiation in the operating room. This could potentially put patients and health-care professionals at additional risk. We recommend that a standardised national training programme on the basic principles and safety of ionising radiation is implemented for all practicing orthopaedic surgeons.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This paper is the first UK national survey amongst orthopaedic surgeons and is one of the largest reported internationally.