LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,149
تعداد مقالات10,518
تعداد مشاهده مقاله45,415,424
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله11,291,214
Hamzian, Nima, Asadian, Saeed, Zarghani, Hassan. (1401). A Study of Radiation Protection Standards Compliance in Hospital Radiographic Departments in Iran. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12(5), 513-520. doi: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2108-1375
Nima Hamzian; Saeed Asadian; Hassan Zarghani. "A Study of Radiation Protection Standards Compliance in Hospital Radiographic Departments in Iran". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12, 5, 1401, 513-520. doi: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2108-1375
Hamzian, Nima, Asadian, Saeed, Zarghani, Hassan. (1401). 'A Study of Radiation Protection Standards Compliance in Hospital Radiographic Departments in Iran', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12(5), pp. 513-520. doi: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2108-1375
Hamzian, Nima, Asadian, Saeed, Zarghani, Hassan. A Study of Radiation Protection Standards Compliance in Hospital Radiographic Departments in Iran. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1401; 12(5): 513-520. doi: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2108-1375

A Study of Radiation Protection Standards Compliance in Hospital Radiographic Departments in Iran

Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering
مقاله 9، دوره 12، شماره 5، دی 2022، صفحه 513-520    اصل مقاله (837.87 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Research
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2108-1375
نویسندگان
Nima Hamzian1؛ Saeed Asadian2؛ Hassan Zarghani* 3
1PhD, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
2BSc, Student Research Committee, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran
3PhD, Cardiovascular Diseases Research Center, School of Medicine, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran
چکیده
Background: The X-ray is a critical diagnostic and therapeutic tool with harmful effects. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has some recommendations regarding applying radiation protection principles.
Objective: This study aimed to determine the standards of the typical radiation protection in radiographic departments of hospitals in Iran.
Material and Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, the usual radiation protection standards in places, such as the physical environment of the control and waiting rooms, radiographic devices, the physical space of the darkroom, and shielding facilities, were investigated using a checklist in Iran. A total of 84 hospitals in 51 cities throughout Iran were randomly selected, and the checklists were distributed to the radiation protection officers. In hospitals with multiple radiography rooms, the radiation protection officers were asked to complete the checklist about the room with the highest workload as a baseline to evaluate their facilities. Finally, the authors reviewed all checklists.
Results: In radiology departments in control and waiting rooms, the mean of radiation protection was 71.9%. Pregnancy and radiation warning signs and labels were present in 96.1% of the parameters, while gonad shielding protocols were not presented. 
Conclusion: The principles of observed radiation protection were unsatisfactory, and it is recommended that surveillance be conducted at frequent intervals.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Radiographers؛ Shielding؛ Radiography؛ Radiation Protection؛ Standards
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
مراجع
  1. Ali KN, Jalil SZ. Radiation Safety Awareness among Workers in Battery Manufacturer Company. Proceedings of the 1st Master Project Symposiumon Occupational Safetyand Health; Malaysia: UTM Razak School of Engineering and Advanced Technology; 2017. p. 73.
  2. Zarghani H, Jafari R. Risk assessment of public Gamma radiation in some provinces of Iran. Iran J Med Phys. 2021;18(1):78-83. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2019.35081.1439.
  3. Soudjay S, Bernardine V, Jeanne RM, Vololona RG, Roland R, Harimalala RT. Application of Radiation Protection of Patients in Medical Diagnostic Radiology (Case of Public Hospitals, Fianarantsoa District, Haute Matsiatra Region, Madagascar). Nucl Sci. 2021;6(1):1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.ns.20210601.11.
  4. Kaheni H, Chaparian A, Nafisi-Moghadam R, Hamzian N. Assessment of image quality and radiation dose in some models of digital radiography systems–A Pehamed FLUORAD A+ D phantom study. 2018;53(2):139-44. doi: 10.1051/RADIOPRO/2018012.
  5. Hamzian N, Afereydoon S, Ghorbani M, Abrisham SMJ, Roozmand Z, Abdollahi-Dehkordi S, et al. Equivalent Dose and Risk of Exposure Induced Cancer Death of Different Organs due to Various Image Techniques of EOS Imaging System. J Biomed Phys Eng. 2021;11(3):289-96. doi: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2012-1242. PubMed PMID: 34189117. PubMed PMCID: PMC8236105.
  6. Zarghani H. Local diagnostic reference levels for some common diagnostic X-Ray examinations in Sabzevar county of Iran. Iran J Med Phys. 2018;15(1):62-5. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2017.19211.1237.
  7. Davies EM, Bridges AJ, Chung EM. Does radiology require informed consent for radiation risk? Br J Radiol. 2021;94(1127):20210620. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20210620. PubMed PMID: 34357789. PubMed PMCID: PMC8553186.
  8. Do KH. General Principles of Radiation Protection in Fields of Diagnostic Medical Exposure. J Korean Med Sci. 2016;31(1):S6-9. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.S1.S6. PubMed PMID: 26908991. PubMed PMCID: PMC4756345.
  9. Moghimi P, Hajimiri K, Saghatchi F, Rezaeejam H. Assessment of the Awareness Level of Radiation Protection Among Radiographers Working in the Medical Imaging Wards of the Hospitals in Zanjan, Iran. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2021;194(2-3):97-103. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncab088. PubMed PMID: 34128525.
  10. Ng KH, Brady Z, Ng AH, Soh HS, Chou YH, Varma D. The status of radiation protection in medicine in the Asia-Pacific region. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2021;65(4):464-70. doi: 10.1111/1754-9485.13165. PubMed PMID: 33606359.
  11. Vassileva J, Holmberg O. Radiation protection perspective to recurrent medical imaging: what is known and what more is needed? Br J Radiol. 2021;94(1126):20210477. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20210477. PubMed PMID: 34161167. PubMed PMCID: PMC9328070.
  12. Nyaichyai KS. Occupational radiation safety studies in Nepal–A review. Int J Occup Saf Health. 2022;12(1):45-53.
  13. Naserpour F, Hassanpour N, Gholami M. Entrance dose determination and effective dose calculation in chest and skull radiographies: an experimental and computational study. Int J Radiat Res. 2022;19(4):899-906. doi: 10.52547/ijrr.19.4.16.
  14. MacKay M, Hancy C, Crowe A, D’Rozario R, Ng CK. Attitudes of medical imaging technologists on use of gonad shielding in general radiography. 2012;59(2):35-9. doi: 10.1002/j.2051-3909.2012.tb00172.x.
  15. Jackson G, Brennan PC. Radio-protective aprons during radiological examinations of the thorax: an optimum strategy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;121(4):391-4. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncl076. PubMed PMID: 16782981.
  16. Hiles P. Using patient shielding - What is the risk? Br J Radiol. 2021;94(1126):20210701. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20210701. PubMed PMID: 34347543. PubMed PMCID: PMC9328061.
  17. Frantzen MJ, Robben S, Postma AA, Zoetelief J, Wildberger JE, Kemerink GJ. Gonad shielding in paediatric pelvic radiography: disadvantages prevail over benefit. Insights Imaging. 2012;3(1):23-32. doi: 10.1007/s13244-011-0130-3. PubMed PMID: 22695996. PubMed PMCID: PMC3292647.
  18. Jeukens CRLPN, Kütterer G, Kicken PJ, Frantzen MJ, Van Engelshoven JMA, et al. Gonad shielding in pelvic radiography: modern optimised X-ray systems might allow its discontinuation. Insights Imaging. 2020;11(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s13244-019-0828-1. PubMed PMID: 32030539. PubMed PMCID: PMC7005227.
  19. Marsh RM, Silosky M. Patient shielding in diagnostic imaging: discontinuing a legacy practice. Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212(4):755-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20508. PubMed PMID: 30673332.
  20. Goren AD, Prins RD, Dauer LT, Quinn B, Al-Najjar A, Faber RD, et al. Effect of leaded glasses and thyroid shielding on cone beam CT radiation dose in an adult female phantom. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(6):20120260. doi: 10.1259/dmfr.20120260. PubMed PMID: 23412460. PubMed PMCID: PMC3667524.
  21. Damilakis J. Pregnancy and diagnostic X-rays. Eur Radiol Suppl. 2004;14:33-9.
  22. Rasoul Tohidnia M, Rasool A, Fatemeh A, Rahimi SA, Neda A, Hosna S. Evaluation of radiation protection principles observance in dental radiography centers (West of Iran): Cross-sectional study. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2020;190(1):1-5. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncaa071. PubMed PMID: 32476012.
  23. Mohebbi Z, Ershadpoor R, Ostovari M, Rakhshan M. Radiation Protection Capability of Operating Room Personnel: Development and Psychometric Properties of a Questionnaire. J Biomed Phys Eng. 2021;11(5):603-612. doi: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2008-1161. PubMed PMID: 34722405. PubMed PMCID: PMC8546165.
  24. Rostamzadeh A, Farzizadeh M, Fatehi D. Evaluation of the level of protection in Radiology Departments of Kermanshah, Iran. Iran J Med Phys. 2015;12(3):200-8. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2015.6221.
  25. Farzaneh JK, Mehmandoost-Khajeh-Dad AA, Namayeshi B, Varmal ZN, Mesgarani M. Condition of observing the principles of radiation protection in radiology centers in Sistan and Baluchestan province of Iran. Int J Curr Res Rev. 2013;5(1):82.
  26. Fawcett SL, Barter SJ. The use of gonad shielding in paediatric hip and pelvis radiographs. Br J Radiol. 2009;82(977):363-70. doi: 10.1259/bjr/86609718. PubMed PMID: 19386959.
  27. Ploussi A, Efstathopoulos EP. Importance of establishing radiation protection culture in Radiology Department. World J Radiol. 2016;8(2):142-7. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v8.i2.142. PubMed PMID: 26981223. PubMed PMCID: PMC4770176.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,962
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 461


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب