Exposure to ionizing radiation is of concern to many medical practitioners. The risks of radiation exposure are well documented within the scientific literature and include cataract formation, skin cancer, thyroid disease and leukaemia.1 Medical staff who work in the operating theatre are a sizable population potentially at risk for these complications.2 With advances in medical technology in past decades and an ongoing trend towards minimally invasive techniques, there has been a significant increase in the use of fluoroscopy.3-5 During fluoroscopic procedures staff are exposed to both direct and scattered radiation. Procedures that require long fluoroscopic screening times, such as interventional radiology, cardiology and orthopaedic surgery, place the proceduralist at high risk of radiation exposure. Orthopaedic surgeons must often remain close to the x-ray beam during procedures and cannot use distance to reduce radiation exposure.
In recent years, there is a rising alertness concerning the harmful effects of exposure of long-term low-dose irradiation. In 2005 a report by Mastrangelo et al identified orthopaedic surgeons as having an increased cancer risk.6 In 2010 Chou et al reported that the prevalence of cancer within female orthopaedic surgeons was 1.9 fold greater than that of women in the general US population.7,8 Specific orthopaedic procedures such as closed intramedullary nailing of the femur are responsible for a high level of scattered radiation
• Allergic reaction to the radiotracer. Severe reactions may cause a rash or breathing trouble. These reactions are rare.
Paradise Hills Medical Center’s radiation department, made a radiation overdose on 22 oncology patients. The error was attributed to a flaw in the radiation equipment
Advances in both radiography and radiation treatment keep on advancing and get to be more sophisticated. Cases incorporate digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in which, apparently, there is the potential for more prominent inclusion by radiographers and by radiation therapists in image guided radiation treatment. Looking even to the moderately later past underscores the degree to which change is happening in the radiography and radiation treatment work environment. Case in point, ten years prior it was radiologists who embedded cannulas for CT patients (AIR 2014, 1). Presently radiographers and attendants attempt the assignment. In private radiology hones, Australian radiographers now consistently embed central lines and do feature joint, shoulder, arm, and tendon infusions under supervision.
There are pros and cons to daily usage and exposed to radiation. Radiation exposure to the bone
One of another main reason for all the irregularities during the procedure occur mainly due to the confusion of communication between the radiographer and the surgeon because of a formal language is not being used in order to operate the fluoroscopy (Suhm et al., 2003 ).This creates a confusion and loss of crucial time which eventually leads to numerous position adjustments, while doing so the radiographer had to expose the patient several times before the desired position can be obtained which can prove to be serious threat depending upon the nature of patient as exposure to radiation differs depending upon the nature and status of a patient.
Although there have been signs of leukemia, there is still uncertainty if that long hours of radiation exposure has any effect on x-ray techs. (RSNA) Although I first believed that as an x-ray tech I would be diagnosed with cancer or some other disease, I now know that there is only a slight possibility that I will even be diagnosed. Even though getting zapped by some kind of radiation would turn the x-ray tech into a powerful beast would be cool, it is impossible… for now anyways.
The article Radiation Protection of Medical Staff1 looks at the various occupational hazards medical imaging personnel face on a day to day basis. As technology has improved over the years, there has been an increase in the number of medical imaging procedures in which medical imaging staff must stay in the room or near the patient when the radiation exposure takes place. Because of this, medical imaging personnel could be at a substantial risk of occupational exposure to radiation and they must be aware of the proper actions and steps that are in place to keep their occupational exposure dose as low as reasonably achievable.
Although some Physicians are knowledgeable about radiation safety, others have little or no knowledge about radiation safety and does not consider this factor when ordering imaging examinations. Furthermore, non-physician health care providers may be granted the authority to order imaging studies, and their ordering patterns are likely to reflect the behavior of their supervising Physicians (American College of Radiology). Examples of non-physician health care providers include Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners. Today, radiography is widely used in the operating rooms within hospitals. Physicians, Physician Assistants, and others will use a manually operated foot switch, which is attached to the C-arm. This allows the Surgeon to
The quality of medical imaging is of the utmost importance in terms of safety, and must be strictly regulated through federal legislature in addition to state legislature, ensuring the persons administering radiation are held to the highest of standards. Successfully completing accredited programs in radiologic sciences, having thorough knowledge of and resolute compliance with the rules of ethics, as well as achieving certification through the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists (A.R.R.T.) by means of examination warrants an imaging professional with the tools necessary to provide and maintain a safe environment for themselves and their patients alike. Respectively, all of these components contribute to a health care professional’s
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
Cancer, like other illnesses does not discriminate. It affects the rich and the poor and anyone who is susceptible to it. According to the American Cancer Society, millions of people are diagnosed each year. With these diagnostics, there are also many deaths. This is because some people do not respond to treatment or they come in too late. There have been some cases where there are no treatments or cures for the type of cancer as well. Cancer is like a plague and it has to be stopped and it takes the job of radiation therapists and many other oncology specialists to come together to defeat it.
I agree with you that doses are very small. I see your point of caring for the patient and not necessarily use a lead shield. However, remember the rules of personal protection: Time, Dose and Distance. If you have a procedure that might take you an hour and you will spend it with a patient, you will be exposed to a higher dose of radiation. I would think that in this particular example, we should use a lead shield, because we want to minimize/ decrease our annual dose of radiation exposure. If we will neglect all the safety rules, we might be in trouble. You always wear your seat belt while driving, right? It will increase your chance of survival during a car accident. Some people neglect to do that, like my husband, and his risk of being
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.
When assisting the patient, the radiographers have to make sure they provide radiation safety not only for the patient but also for themselves. There are many different methods to providing safety. With the equipment and radiation dosage, highest KVp and the lowest mAs is used to provide the minimum amount of dosage required for the procedure. Furthermore, safety can be provided by reducing the amount of rime in radiation area, by putting as much distance between you and the radiation source as possible. When performing a portable examination stand at least six feet from x-ray source and wear a lead apron. The patient should remove any jewelry or metal accessories that may interfere with radiation procedure and both the technologist and the patient needs to wear protective lead shields for example lead gloves, aprons, skirts and thyroid shields to protect the other body parts from the radiation. It is advised to also always wear monitoring device at collar level. Lastly, the technologist uses immobilization devices to hold the patients when needed.
radiation (the kind used in X-rays) is known to cause cancer at high doses, the risks of