Beliefs, Facilitating Factors, and Barriers in Using Personal Dosimeter among Medical Radiation Workers in a Middle-Income Asian Setting

This qualitative study explores the medical radiation workers' (MRWs) beliefs with the support of the theory of planned behaviour's constructs regarding the use of personal dosimeters in order to identify the facilitating factors and barriers to practising good personal dose monitoring. The exploration was conducted through semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 63 MRWs from the public, private, and university hospitals. Belief statements from the informants were organized under the behavioural, normative, and control belief, as guided by the theory. A thematic analysis found that a majority of informants acknowledged the benefits of using dosimeters. However, several factors influenced the actual usage. The informants were hesitant to use the dosimeter as the loss of the device involved an expensive penalty. They also mentioned that delayed dosimeter supplies due to late budget approval in the hospitals and some other reasons had got them disconnected from the monitoring system. The workers' attitudes and social norms highly induced their dosimeter usage as well; some perceived themselves to be at low risk for high exposure to radiation, and forgetfulness was also mentioned as a reason for lack of adherence. Device physical factor influenced low dosimeter use too. This study highlighted some unique findings in Asian settings. A better understanding of the underlying reasons for the lack of dosimeter use will be useful in developing strategies to increase good practices in personal radiation monitoring.

Evaluation of scattered radiation dose received by medical staff during uterine artery embolization in the operating room

BACKGROUND:

The air kerma radiation doses have gained much attention since the operating room interventional radiology is a place where medical staff are exposed to a fluoroscopy environment and gain a cumulative dose during the uterine artery embolization procedure.

OBJECTIVE:

We aimed to evaluate the radiation dose received by medical staff by applying a flat X-ray machine in the surgical room during uterine artery embolization.

METHODS:

An ATOM humanoid model was laid on the operating table and simulated a patient. The scattered radiation dose received by the radiologist, anesthetist and radiologic technologist was evaluated. The scintillation detector was adopted. The measurement points were 50 cm, 100 cm and 150 cm above the floor, representing the limbs, abdomen and thyroid level, respectively. We compared the X-rays under different tube voltages of 70, 80, and 90, respectively and frames per second (FPS) of 30, 15, and 7.5, respectively. We configured the dose level per pulse of 40 nGy with a fixed detector.

RESULTS:

In Section 1, when the tube voltage was 70 kVp and 7.5 FPS, the average radiation doses of limbs, abdomen and thyroid level was 0.48, 1.3 and 1.9 μSv/min respectively. When the tube voltage was 80 kVp and the fluoroscopy decreases from 30 FPS to 7.5 FPS, 58% of the radiation dose was reduced. When the tube voltage was 90 kVp, the radiation dose in the lead garment increased 31–177% in comparison to when the tube voltage was 80 kVp. Sections 2 and 3 were far away from the central ray, so the highest radiation dose 100 cm above the floor were 0.05 and 0.02 μSv/min.

CONCLUSIONS:

Lead garment can effectively reduce medical staff from occupational doses with an average attenuation rate of 90%. 80 kVp was most commonly used. Fluoroscopy 7.5 FPS was used 100 cm above the floor in A section and the lowest radiation dose was 1.33 μSv/min. The operator should decrease the duration of X-rays or adopt suspended lead shielding to decrease the radiation dose received by the operator. When kVp increases, the penetration increases. Decreasing FPS cannot decrease occupational doses of medical staff.

COMP report: CPQR technical quality control guidelines for major dosimetry equipment

The Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists (COMP), in close partnership with the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR) has developed a series of Technical Quality Control (TQC) guidelines for radiation treatment equipment. These guidelines outline the performance objectives that equipment should meet to ensure an acceptable level of radiation treatment quality. The TQC guidelines have been rigorously reviewed and field tested in a variety of Canadian radiation treatment facilities. The development process enables rapid review and update to keep the guidelines current with changes in technology (the most update version of this guideline can be found on the CPQR website). This article provides guidelines for quality control testing of major dosimetry equipment.