Are we aware of radiation: A study about necessity of diagnostic X-ray exposure

Knowledge and perceptions of ionising radiation among Croatian general practitioners: is there cause for concern?

Recent data suggest that general practitioners (GPs) are insufficiently familiar with health risks associated with ionising radiation and radiation doses. The aim of our cross-sectional study was therefore to see if this holds true for Croatian GPs. To do that, we distributed a questionnaire about ionising radiation and doses used in various radiological procedures by email or by handing it out to participants at a national GP conference. We received responses from 120 participating GPs. Most were women (83.1 %), and the mean participant age was 44.2 years (range 26-65) with mean practice of 17.1 years (range 1-40). Most participants (97 %) believed patients should be informed about the procedures they were referred to. All respondents knew that radiological procedures irradiate the patient's body, but not everyone agreed that they could be harmful. Less than half (47 %) thought that exposure to a single irradiation dose was enough to increase cancer risk. Most participants (89.2 %) identified X-ray scans as the largest irradiation source, whereas three GPs replied that computed tomography (CT) and conventional X-ray procedures did not involve radiation. Some respondents did not know if ultrasound involved ionising radiation. Although most GPs were women, only 21.7 % correctly identified the radiation dose in mammography. Our findings confirm inadequate GPs' knowledge of radiation exposures and call for better training programmes as part of continuing professional development.

Establishing Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Head Computed Tomography Examinations

Background/Objectives: Head Computed Tomography (CT) is an essential diagnostic tool for identifying brain pathologies and visualizing blood vessels. However, CT exposes patients to ionizing radiation, making it necessary to establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) to ensure patient safety. This study aimed to establish DRLs for head CT scans and assess the influence of patient characteristics on radiation dose. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 2043 non-contrast and 488 contrast-enhanced head CT scans performed between 1 July 2023 and 31 March 2024 using a SIEMENS SOMATOM Definition Edge machine. Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDIvol) and Dose-Length Product (DLP) values were analyzed, with DRLs set at the 75th percentile. The influence of gender, height, and weight on radiation dose was also evaluated. Results: The DRL for both non-contrast and contrast-enhanced scans was 58.18 mGy for CTDIvol and 1018.11 mGy·cm for DLP per acquisition. Total DLP was 2046.09 mGy·cm for contrast-enhanced and 1027.99 mGy·cm for non-contrast scans. No significant correlation was found between patient characteristics and radiation dose, allowing for a uniform DRL to be established. Conclusions: Uniform DRLs were successfully established for head CT scans, ensuring safe radiation doses for both non-contrast and contrast-enhanced studies. The lack of correlation between patient-specific factors and dose supports the use of standardized DRLs, contributing to optimized radiation safety in head CT diagnostics.

Patient perspectives on ionising radiation exposure from computed tomography in Saudi Arabia: a knowledge and perception study

The objective of this study was to evaluate patient knowledge and understanding of ionising radiation and dosage, as well as the accompanying risks related to computed tomography scans. A total of 412 outpatients who underwent computed tomography (CT) scans were surveyed to assess their understanding of radiation dose and exposure risks. CT was correctly classified as an ionising radiation by 56.8% of the respondents. More than half of the patients reported that a CT scan increases the probability of inducing cancer. Awareness of varying radiation doses in different CT exams was noted in 75.2% of patients, but only 21.4% reported having discussions with their physician about radiation dose. Gender, age and employment were significantly correlated with knowledge levels. The survey findings indicate a limited understanding of the hazards associated with ionising radiation used in CT scans, highlighting a need for increased awareness and education on radiation protection to ensure informed consent.

Does the use of computed tomography scenogram alone enable diagnosis in cases of bowel obstruction?

BACKGROUND

Ileus is a pathological condition of the abdomen that presents as a medical emergency. It is characterized by potential complications such as perforation and ischemia, which can lead to significant morbidity and mortality if not promptly addressed. The successful management of ileus relies heavily on the timely and precise identification of the condition. While conventional radiography (CR) is commonly used as the primary diagnostic tool, its accuracy in identifying obstructions ranges from 46% to 80%. Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy of identifying the location and etiology of intestinal obstruction by CR is limited, therefore making computed tomography (CT) the ideal imaging modality in this regard.

AIM

To determine the presence of acute bowel obstruction (BO) on abdominal CT scenogram images and the accuracy of determining its possible location, taking into account the experience of the observers.

METHODS

A retrospective screening was conducted on an ensemble of 46 individuals who presented to the emergency department between January 2021 and January 2022 with severe abdominal pain and were subsequently monitored for suspected ileus. The abdominal CT scans of these patients were assessed by three radiologists with varying levels of experience (1, 3, and 10 years) at different intervals (1 mo apart). The evaluation focused on determining the presence or absence of BO, as well as identifying the potential location of the obstruction (small bowel or large bowel). The study employed Kappa statistics to assess inter-observer variances, while the McNamer test was used to evaluate obstruction and segmentation discrepancies between observations. A significance level of P < 0.05 was determined to indicate statistical significance.

RESULTS

Out of the total sample size of 46 patients, 15 individuals (32.6%) were identified as female, while the remaining 31 individuals (67.4%) were identified as male. The ultimate diagnosis of 42 instances (91.3%) indicated ileus resulting from mechanical obstruction (MO). Among these patients, 14 (33%) experienced obstruction in the large bowel (LB), while 28 (66%) experienced obstruction in the small bowel (SB). The initial evaluation yielded sensitivity rates of 76.19%, 83.31%, and 83.33%, and diagnostic accuracy rates of 69.56%, 76.08%, and 80.43% for the detection of BO among the three observers. The initial study revealed that the average sensitivity of three observers in detecting the presence of ileus caused by MO was 80.94%, while the diagnostic accuracy was 75.35%. Based on the first evaluation, the senior observer demonstrated the highest sensitivity (85.71%), negative predictive value (92.60%), and diagnostic accuracy (80.43%) when accurately estimating the thick and thin segmentation, as per the final diagnosis. There was no statistically significant disparity observed in the sensitivities pertaining to the identification of ileus during the second assessment, as well as the precise determination of the segment level inside the LB or SB, when comparing the second and third observers. Nevertheless, although there was no statistically significant alteration in the detection rate of ileus by the first observer, there was a notable rise in the accuracy rate of segment estimating (73.91%). The senior assessor had a higher level of accuracy in assessing the existence of ileus and segmentation compared to the other evaluators in both evaluations.

CONCLUSION

The findings of our study indicate that the sensitivity and accuracy rates of abdominal CT scenogram scans in diagnosing acute MOs are similar to or greater than those of CR. Additionally, the study revealed that radiologists with more experience demonstrated a higher likelihood of accurately predicting the existence and potential localization of MO compared to their less experienced counterparts.

Cervical Spine Instability Screening Tool Thai Version: Assessment of Convergent Validity and Rater Reliability

Neck pain, dizziness, difficulty supporting the head for an extended period, and impaired movement are all symptoms of cervical spine instability, which may produce cervical spondylolisthesis in patients who have more severe symptoms. To avoid problems and consequences, early detection of cervical spine instability is required. A previous study created a Thai-language version of a cervical spine instability screening tool, named the CSI-TH, and evaluated its content validity. However, other characteristics of the CSI-TH still needed to be evaluated. The objective of the current study was to assess the rater reliability and convergent validity of the CSI-TH. A total of 160 participants with nonspecific chronic neck pain were included in the study. The Neck Disability Index Thai version (NDI-TH), the Visual Analog Scale Thai version (VAS-TH), and the Modified STarT Back Screening Tool Thai version (mSBST-TH) were used to evaluate the convergent validity of the CSI-TH. To determine inter- and intra-rater reliabilities, novice and experienced physical therapists were involved. The results showed that rater reliabilities were excellent: the intra-rater reliability was 0.992 (95% CI = 0.989 ± 0.994), and the inter-rater reliability was 0.987 (95% CI = 0.983 ± 0.991). The convergent validities of the VAS-TH, NDI-TH, and mSBST-TH when compared with the CSI-TH were 0.5446, 0.5545, and 0.5136, respectively (p < 0.01). The CSI-TH was developed for use by physical therapists and is reliable. It can be used by physical therapists, whether they are experienced or novices, and has an acceptable correlation to other neck-related questionnaires. The CSI-TH is concise, suitable for clinical use, and lower-priced when compared to the gold standard in diagnosis for patients with cervical spine instability.

Antenatal imaging: A pictorial review

Today, in parallel with the use of imaging modalities increases in all fields, the use of imaging methods in pregnant women is increasing. Imaging has become an integral component of routine pregnancy follow-up. Imaging provides parents with an early opportunity to learn about the current situation, including prenatal detection of anomalies or diseases, etiology, prognosis, and the availability of prenatal or postnatal treatments. Various imaging modalities, especially ultrasonography, are frequently used for imaging both maternal and fetal imaging. The goal of this review was to address imaging modalities in terms of usefulness and safety, as well as to provide demonstrative examples for disorders. And this review provides current information on selecting a safe imaging modality to evaluate the pregnant and the fetus, the safety of contrast medium use, and summarizes major pathological situations with demonstrative sonographic images to assist radiologists and obstetricians in everyday practice.