Search

Purpose: To summarize dose trends from 1980 to 2020 for 19,651 U.S. Radiologic Technologists who reported assisting with fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures (FGIPs), overall and by work history characteristics., Materials and Methods: A total of 762,310 annual personal dose equivalents at a 10-mm reference depth (doses) during 1980-2020 for 43,823 participants of the U.S. Radiologic Technologists (USRT) cohort who responded to work history questionnaires administered during 2012-2014 were summarized. This population included 19,651 technologists who reported assisting with FGIP (≥1 time per month for ≥12 consecutive months) at any time during the study period. Doses corresponding to assistance with FGIP were estimated in terms of proximity to patients, monthly procedure frequency, and procedure type. Box plots and summary statistics (eg, medians and percentiles) were used to describe annual doses and dose trends., Results: Median annual dose corresponding to assistance with FGIP was 0.65 mSv (interquartile range [IQR], 0.60-1.40 mSv; 95th percentile, 6.80). Higher occupational doses with wider variability were associated with close proximity to patients during assistance with FGIP (median, 1.20 mSv [IQR, 0.60-4.18 mSv]; 95th percentile, 12.66), performing ≥20 FGIPs per month (median, 0.75 mSv [IQR, 0.60-2.40 mSv]; 95th percentile, 9.44), and assisting with high-dose FGIP (median, 0.70 mSv [IQR, 0.60-1.90 mSv]; 95th percentile, 8.30)., Conclusions: Occupational doses corresponding to assistance with FGIP were generally low but varied with exposure frequency, procedure type, and proximity to patients. These results highlight the need for vigilant dose monitoring, radiation safety training, and proper protective equipment., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Abstract: The process to arrive at the radiation protection practices of today to protect workers, patients, and the public, including sensitive populations, has been a long and deliberative one. This paper presents an overview of the US Environmental Protection Agency's (US EPA) responsibility in protecting human health and the environment from unnecessary exposure to radiation. The origins of this responsibility can be traced back to early efforts, a century ago, to protect workers from x rays and radium. The system of radiation protection we employ today is robust and informed by the latest scientific consensus. It has helped reduce or eliminate unnecessary exposures to workers, patients, and the public while enabling the safe and beneficial uses of radiation and radioactive material in diverse areas such as energy, medicine, research, and space exploration. Periodic reviews and analyses of research on health effects of radiation by scientific bodies such as the National Academy of Sciences, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, and the International Commission on Radiological Protection continue to inform radiation protection practices while new scientific information is gathered. As a public health agency, US EPA is keenly interested in research findings that can better elucidate the effects of exposure to low doses and low dose rates of radiation as applicable to protection of diverse populations from various sources of exposure. Professional organizations such as the Health Physics Society can provide radiation protection practitioners with continuing education programs on the state of the science and describe the key underpinnings of the system of radiological protection. Such efforts will help equip and prepare radiation protection professionals to more effectively communicate radiation health information with their stakeholders., (Copyright © 2024 Health Physics Society.)

Purpose: To describe the range of occupational badge dose readings and annualized dose records among physicians performing fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures using job title information provided by the same 3 major medical institutions in 2009, 2012, and 2015., Materials and Methods: The Radiation Safety Office of selected hospitals was contacted to request assistance with identifying physicians in a large commercial dosimetry database. All entries judged to be uninformative of occupational doses to FGI procedure staff were excluded. Monthly and annualized doses were described with univariate statistics and box-and-whisker plots., Results: The dosimetry data set of interventional radiology staff contained 169 annual dose records from 77 different physicians and 698 annual dose records from 455 nonphysicians. The median annualized lens dose equivalent values among physicians (11.9 mSv; interquartile range [IQR], 6.9-20.0 mSv) was nearly 3-fold higher than those among nonphysician medical staff assisting with FGI procedures (4.0 mSv; IQR, 1.8-6.7 mSv) (P < .001). During the study period, without eye protection, 25% (23 of 93) of the physician annualized lens dose equivalent values may have exceeded 20 mSv; for nonphysician medical staff, this value may have been exceeded 3.5% (6 of 173) of the time. However, these values did not account for eye protection., Conclusions: The findings from this study highlight the importance of mitigating occupational dose to the eyes of medical staff, particularly physicians, performing or assisting with FGI procedures. Training on radiation protection principles, the use of personal protective equipment, and patient radiation dose management can all help ensure that the occupational radiation dose is adequately controlled., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background Occupational doses to most medical radiation workers have declined substantially since the 1950s because of improvements in radiation protection practices. However, different patterns may have emerged for radiologic technologists working with nuclear medicine because of the higher per-procedure doses and increasing workloads. Purpose To summarize annual occupational doses during a 36-year period for a large cohort of U.S. radiologic technologists and to compare dose between general radiologic technologists and those specializing in nuclear medicine procedures. Materials and Methods Annual personal dose equivalents (referred to as doses ) from 1980 to 2015 were summarized for 58 434 (62%) participants in the U.S. Radiologic Technologists (USRT) cohort who responded to the most recent mailed work history survey (years 2012-2014) and reported never regularly performing interventional procedures. Doses were partitioned according to the performance of nuclear medicine (yes or no, frequency, procedure type) by calendar year. Annual dose records were described by using summary statistics (eg, median and 25th and 75th percentiles). Results Median annual doses related to performance of general radiologic procedures decreased from 0.60 mSv (interquartile range [IQR], 0.10-1.9 mSv) in 1980 to levels below the limits of detection by 2015, whereas annual doses related to performance of nuclear medicine procedures remained relatively high during this period (median, 1.2 mSv; IQR, 0.12-3.0 mSv). Higher median annual doses were associated with more frequent (above vs below the median) performance of diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures (≥35 vs <35 times per week; 1.6 mSv [IQR, 0.30-3.3 mSv] and 0.9 mSv [IQR, 0.10-2.6 mSv]). Higher and more variable annual doses were associated with more frequent performance of cardiac nuclear medicine (≥10 times per week) and PET (nine or more times per week) examinations (median, 1.6 mSv [IQR, 0.30-2.2 mSv] and 2.2 mSv [IQR, 0.10-4.6 mSv], respectively). Conclusion Annual doses to U.S. radiologic technologists performing general radiologic procedures declined during a 36-year period. However, consistently higher and more variable doses were associated with the performance of nuclear medicine procedures, particularly cardiac nuclear medicine and PET procedures. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mettler and Guiberteau in this issue.

This work provides dose coefficients necessary to reconstruct doses used in epidemiological studies of tuberculosis patients treated from the 1930s through the 1960s, who were exposed to diagnostic imaging while undergoing treatment. We made use of averaged imaging parameters from measurement data, physician interviews, and available literature of the Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study and, on occasion, from a similar study of tuberculosis patients from Massachusetts, United States, treated between 1925 and 1954. We used computational phantoms of the human anatomy and Monte Carlo radiation transport methods to compute dose coefficients that relate dose in air, at a point 20 cm away from the source, to absorbed dose in 58 organs. We selected five male and five female phantoms, based on the mean height and weight of Canadian tuberculosis patients in that era, for the 1-, 5-, 10-, 15-year old and adult ages. Using high-performance computers at the National Institutes of Health, we simulated 2,400 unique fluoroscopic and radiographic exposures by varying x-ray beam quality, field size, field shuttering, imaged anatomy, phantom orientation, and computational phantom. Compared with previous dose coefficients reported for this population, our dosimetry system uses improved anatomical phantoms constructed from computed tomography imaging datasets. The new set of dose coefficients includes tissues that were not previously assessed, in particular, for tissues outside the x-ray field or for pediatric patients. In addition, we provide dose coefficients for radiography and for fluoroscopic procedures not previously assessed in the dosimetry of this cohort (i.e. pneumoperitoneum and chest aspirations). These new dose coefficients would allow a comprehensive assessment of exposures in the cohort. In addition to providing newly derived dose coefficients, we believe the automation and methods developed to complete these dosimetry calculations are generalizable and can be applied to other epidemiological studies interested in an exposure assessment from medical x-ray imaging. These epidemiological studies provide important data for assessing health risks of radiation exposure to help inform the current system of radiological protection and efforts to optimize the use of radiation in medical studies.

It has long been known that relatively high-dose ionising radiation exposure (> 1 Gy) can induce cataract, but there has been no evidence that this occurs at low doses (< 100 mGy). To assess low-dose risk, participants from the US Radiologic Technologists Study, a large, prospective cohort, were followed from date of mailed questionnaire survey completed during 1994-1998 to the earliest of self-reported diagnosis of cataract/cataract surgery, cancer other than non-melanoma skin, or date of last survey (up to end 2014). Cox proportional hazards models with age as timescale were used, adjusted for a priori selected cataract risk factors (diabetes, body mass index, smoking history, race, sex, birth year, cumulative UVB radiant exposure). 12,336 out of 67,246 eligible technologists reported a history of diagnosis of cataract during 832,479 person years of follow-up, and 5509 from 67,709 eligible technologists reported undergoing cataract surgery with 888,420 person years of follow-up. The mean cumulative estimated 5-year lagged eye-lens absorbed dose from occupational radiation exposures was 55.7 mGy (interquartile range 23.6-69.0 mGy). Five-year lagged occupational radiation exposure was strongly associated with self-reported cataract, with an excess hazard ratio/mGy of 0.69 × 10 -3 (95% CI 0.27 × 10 -3 to 1.16 × 10 -3 , p < 0.001). Cataract risk remained statistically significant (p = 0.030) when analysis was restricted to < 100 mGy cumulative occupational radiation exposure to the eye lens. A non-significantly increased excess hazard ratio/mGy of 0.34 × 10 -3 (95% CI - 0.19 × 10 -3 to 0.97 × 10 -3 , p = 0.221) was observed for cataract surgery. Our results suggest that there is excess risk for cataract associated with radiation exposure from low-dose and low dose-rate occupational exposures.

There are well-documented associations of glaucoma with high-dose radiation exposure, but only a single study suggesting risk of glaucoma, and less conclusively macular degeneration, associated with moderate-dose exposure. We assessed risk of glaucoma and macular degeneration associated with occupational eye-lens radiation dose, using participants from the US Radiologic Technologists Study, followed from the date of surveys in 1994-1998, 2003-2005 to the earliest of diagnosis of glaucoma or macular degeneration, cancer other than non-melanoma skin cancer, or date of last survey (2012-2014). We excluded those with baseline disease or previous radiotherapy history. Cox proportional hazards models with age as timescale were used. There were 1631 cases of newly self-reported doctor-diagnosed cases of glaucoma and 1331 of macular degeneration among 69,568 and 69,969 eligible subjects, respectively. Estimated mean cumulative eye-lens absorbed dose from occupational radiation exposures was 0.058 Gy. The excess relative risk/Gy for glaucoma was -0.57 (95% CI -1.46, 0.60, p = 0.304) and for macular degeneration was 0.32 (95% CI -0.32, 1.27, p = 0.381), suggesting that there is no appreciable risk for either endpoint associated with low-dose and low dose-rate radiation exposure. Since this is the first examination of glaucoma and macular degeneration associated with low-dose radiation exposure, this result needs to be replicated in other low-dose studies.