Dental Radiation Exposure of Children Essay

Over the past few decades one of the main arguments patients have when going to see a dentist is the amount of radiation they are exposed to while taking dental radiographs. Every time this happens the dentist has to sit the patient down and talk to them about the cause versus effect. While many patients think that they are being over exposed to radiation while having a standard set of x-rays every year, they never take into account the amount of radiation that they are receiving through other devices of by just walking outside. Not many dental providers think of the amount of radiation they are receiving just by working with it every single day. The lack of knowledge that dental providers have about radiation exposure can affect their overall

There are two very divergent viewpoints across the medical provider landscape as to whether radiological testing is used too much or not enough. The basic equation comes down to a balance between being sure that certain conditions and disorders are not in play and not wasting time/money and/or exposing the patient to potential harm due to the fairly dangerous nature of being exposed to too much radiation.

study has shown that children under the age of eight absorb twice the amount of radiation

All of our X-rays are digital, using 90 percent less radiation to get an even more accurate image of your mouth. And we use ViziLite Plus, which uses ultraviolet light to help detect signs of oral cancer.

These images call for up to 90% less radiation than with standard film type x-rays. Instead of making use of the traditional silver-oxide x-ray film that must be formulated and then fixed in caustic and ecologically harmful solutions, the new system calls for pictures by way of a small digital sensing unit and it then immediately sends a Image of the tooth on to the video monitor in the treatment room. Therefore, we can easily see your teeth and surrounding components Instantly. Not only does the new digital x-ray do away with the typical wait for x-ray film to be prepared, but it also is highly sensitive, so that patients are exposed to even less radiation than with conventional x-rays.

160. This is quite a significant jump from 1987, when the NCRP Report No. 93 stated that a mere 11% was attributed to “medical imaging with ionizing radiation.”1 (pp169-170CT) In 2012, Kyle Morford and his colleagues reported that “over the past decade CT has increased from 4% to 11% of all diagnostic imaging studies.”2 (p45) This increase in number of scans come with an increase in patient dose. When a chest CT is performed, a patient gets a dose of 8 mSv. When a radiographic exam of the chest is done in two projections, the dose is around 0.02mSv. Of course, there are patient factors and contrast administration to consider, but the difference between the two modalities is roughly 400% increase.3 (p705) Knowing this, why is shielding not practiced in computed

When it comes to medical imaging, there are several different options to choose from for different testing. There are similarities and differences; pros and cons to each. This paper will discuss MRI, CT, and ultrasound. They each have important things to know regarding radiation dose, cost, and reasons to use one over another.

For this reason patients must be aware that there is not a such thing as a safe amount of ionizing radiation. No matter how small the amount, x-rays produce ionizing radiation which is damaging to human tissue and therefore all procedures involving x-ray exposure to the patient are considered dangerous. This being the case, those who administer x-rays should be very knowledgeable about the energy they are dealing with, sadly this is not always the reality we live in. The article titled U.S. Technologists' Radiation Exposure Perceptions and Practices states that "Current literature documents excessive radiation doses from medical uses and a lack of necessary education for physicians, fluoroscopists (ie, cardiologists, radiologist, neurologists, and others trained to perform fluoroscopy) and patients concerning the benefits and dangers of medical radiation."5 This is a huge problem in the concept of patient safety when dealing with the use of ionizing radiation for medical procedures. If those administering the x-rays do not completely understand their dangers than how is a patient who most likely knows very little about the subject suppose to be the safest possible during the

Secondary radiation is developed from any matter being hit by primary radiation. Secondary x-rays have less penetrating energy than primary radiation. Acute (short term) effects of radiation result from high doses of whole body radiation, 100 rads and above. Clinically, a person may experience a mild and transient illness to death. It may occur minutes, hours, or weeks after the exposure. The median lethal whole body dose for humans is 450 rads. Chronic (long-term) effects of radiation can arrive years after the original exposure. It also may have cumulative effects on the somatic cells over the lifetime of the patient. Future generations may experience genetic

Another concern that has risen from the body scan security debacle is the potential health risk that the scans may cause to the passengers, especially in cases of frequent fliers, young children, pregnant women, and the security guards that operate the machines. The scanners put out radiation much like the average X ray machines used in doctor’s offices but at much lower levels. This type of X ray scanner is called “backscatter scanners” and scans only detailed images of the outer flesh, not through the skin or showing bones like conventional X rays. Some supporters of the body scanners claim that the amount of radiation emitted by the scans is almost “insignificant” on normal adults (“Experts”). Although adequate testing has still not been completed to determine the full effects of repeated exposure, the concern still remains. Many OBGYN’s urge pregnant women to opt out of the body scans because a developing fetus is so much more sensitive to any potential harm that may be inflicted by the scanners, especially until more research has been completed (“Experts”).

While healthy babies are born every day, not everyone is so fortunate. In many cases, diagnostic radiology is required for patients during their childhood. Can having this radiation during the formative years lead to adverse effects later in life? The biggest concern from radiation is the risk of cancer. Cancer can occur at any dose from ionizing radiation because it is a stochastic effect, meaning that it is probabilistic. The probability of a stochastic effect, such as cancer, increases as the dose increases. While receiving this radiation may be necessary, it can cause some serious trouble later in life, such as breast cancer, leukemia, and thyroid cancer.

In the class, it has been stressed that there is an importance to lower the radiation dose to the patient. It is important to lower the dose of radiation because it reduces the chance of radiation induced complications. It is the one of the priorities of a radiographer to reduce the radiation dose to the patient. This article was informative of another way to reduce the dose to the patient. Radiation dose for all patients should be reduced as much as possible because radiation does have harmful effects and should be limited throughout a year. The project was done to “determine if having a laser targeting system would decrease the radiation dose by eliminating unintentional radiation prior to localizing the region of interest” (Schenk & Johnston p. 39). The idea behind laser targeting was to limit and reduce the time it took to do the procedure, by reducing time exposed to radiation it lowers the dose to the patient. The laser “aids the technologist in properly aligning the c-arm in the desired position without exposing the patient to radiation” (Schenk & Johnston p. 42). Before the radiation dose was higher because the part of interest was located while radiation was occurring. Now to know that the laser can locate the part of interest before exposing the patient to radiation will help allow me to reduce patient dose if there is a laser with that particular fluoroscopic machine. Even though this experiment was done using pediatric patients, it is relevant information for adult patients as well because it is important to lower radiation dose regardless of age. This information will be helpful in the future because fluoroscopy is a common procedure and if there is a laser available on the machine, it should be utilized so radiographers and students can help reduce the radiation dose to that patient especially, now that it was found to have some effect on

Computed tomography (CT) is one of the most important tools in diagnostic imaging, but is it safe? While CT scanning is extremely accurate in its ability to image bone, blood vessels and soft tissue, a single CT scan subjects the human body to between 150 and 1,100 times the radiation of a conventional x-ray (Storrs, 2013). Since Robert S. Ledley invented the CAT-Scan in 1975, researchers have been working hard to determine if CTs may increases a patient’s risk of getting cancer due to the dramatic increase in radiation.

The effects of radiation can be hazardous to any part of the human body. In this guide I will explain the advantages, and disadvantages of x-ray radiation. I will also discuss the technological advances that we have today then of what we had the past on the human body during radiation exposure. I will explain preventions of exposure and safety precautions that we as dental assistants as well as patients can follow to stay safe.

radiation (the kind used in X-rays) is known to cause cancer at high doses, the risks of