Occupational Doses to Medical Staff Performing or Assisting with Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Procedures

Background Staff who perform fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures are among the most highly radiation-exposed groups in medicine. However, there are limited data on monthly or annual doses (or dose trends over time) for these workers. Purpose To summarize occupational badge doses...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Radiology Vol. 294; no. 2; p. 353
Main Authors: Borrego, David, Kitahara, Cari M, Balter, Stephen, Yoder, Craig
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States 01.02.2020
Subjects:
ISSN:1527-1315, 1527-1315
Online Access:Get more information
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Abstract Background Staff who perform fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures are among the most highly radiation-exposed groups in medicine. However, there are limited data on monthly or annual doses (or dose trends over time) for these workers. Purpose To summarize occupational badge doses (lens dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent values) for medical staff performing or assisting with FGI procedures in 3 recent years after accounting for uninformative values and one- versus two-badge monitoring protocol. Materials and Methods Badge dose entries of medical workers believed to have performed or assisted with FGI procedures were retrospectively collected from the largest dosimetry provider in the United States for 49 991, 81 561, and 125 669 medical staff corresponding to years 2009, 2012, and 2015, respectively. Entries judged to be uninformative of occupational doses to FGI procedures staff were excluded. Monthly and annual occupational doses were described using summary statistics. Results After exclusions, 22.2% (153 033 of 687 912) of the two- and 32.9% (450 173 of 1 366 736) of the one-badge entries were judged to be informative. There were 335 225 and 916 563 of the two- and one-badge entries excluded, respectively, with minimal readings in the above-apron badge. Among the two-badge entries, 123 595 were incomplete and 76 059 had readings indicating incorrect wear of the badges. From 2009 to 2015 there was no change in lens dose equivalent values among workers who wore one badge ( = .96) or those who wore two badges ( = .23). Annual lens dose equivalents for workers wearing one badge (median, 6.9 mSv; interquartile range, 3.8213.8 mSv; = 6218) were similar to those of staff wearing two badges (median, 7.1 mSv; interquartile range, 4.6-11.2 mSv; = 1449) ( = .18), suggesting a similar radiation environment. Conclusion These workers are among the highest exposed to elevated levels of ionizing radiation, although their occupational doses are within U.S. regulatory limits. This is a population that requires consistent and accurate dose monitoring; however, failure to return one or both badges, reversal of badges, and improper badge placement are a major hindrance to this goal. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Karellas in this issue.
AbstractList Background Staff who perform fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures are among the most highly radiation-exposed groups in medicine. However, there are limited data on monthly or annual doses (or dose trends over time) for these workers. Purpose To summarize occupational badge doses (lens dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent values) for medical staff performing or assisting with FGI procedures in 3 recent years after accounting for uninformative values and one- versus two-badge monitoring protocol. Materials and Methods Badge dose entries of medical workers believed to have performed or assisted with FGI procedures were retrospectively collected from the largest dosimetry provider in the United States for 49 991, 81 561, and 125 669 medical staff corresponding to years 2009, 2012, and 2015, respectively. Entries judged to be uninformative of occupational doses to FGI procedures staff were excluded. Monthly and annual occupational doses were described using summary statistics. Results After exclusions, 22.2% (153 033 of 687 912) of the two- and 32.9% (450 173 of 1 366 736) of the one-badge entries were judged to be informative. There were 335 225 and 916 563 of the two- and one-badge entries excluded, respectively, with minimal readings in the above-apron badge. Among the two-badge entries, 123 595 were incomplete and 76 059 had readings indicating incorrect wear of the badges. From 2009 to 2015 there was no change in lens dose equivalent values among workers who wore one badge (P = .96) or those who wore two badges (P = .23). Annual lens dose equivalents for workers wearing one badge (median, 6.9 mSv; interquartile range, 3.8213.8 mSv; n = 6218) were similar to those of staff wearing two badges (median, 7.1 mSv; interquartile range, 4.6-11.2 mSv; n = 1449) (P = .18), suggesting a similar radiation environment. Conclusion These workers are among the highest exposed to elevated levels of ionizing radiation, although their occupational doses are within U.S. regulatory limits. This is a population that requires consistent and accurate dose monitoring; however, failure to return one or both badges, reversal of badges, and improper badge placement are a major hindrance to this goal. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Karellas in this issue.Background Staff who perform fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures are among the most highly radiation-exposed groups in medicine. However, there are limited data on monthly or annual doses (or dose trends over time) for these workers. Purpose To summarize occupational badge doses (lens dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent values) for medical staff performing or assisting with FGI procedures in 3 recent years after accounting for uninformative values and one- versus two-badge monitoring protocol. Materials and Methods Badge dose entries of medical workers believed to have performed or assisted with FGI procedures were retrospectively collected from the largest dosimetry provider in the United States for 49 991, 81 561, and 125 669 medical staff corresponding to years 2009, 2012, and 2015, respectively. Entries judged to be uninformative of occupational doses to FGI procedures staff were excluded. Monthly and annual occupational doses were described using summary statistics. Results After exclusions, 22.2% (153 033 of 687 912) of the two- and 32.9% (450 173 of 1 366 736) of the one-badge entries were judged to be informative. There were 335 225 and 916 563 of the two- and one-badge entries excluded, respectively, with minimal readings in the above-apron badge. Among the two-badge entries, 123 595 were incomplete and 76 059 had readings indicating incorrect wear of the badges. From 2009 to 2015 there was no change in lens dose equivalent values among workers who wore one badge (P = .96) or those who wore two badges (P = .23). Annual lens dose equivalents for workers wearing one badge (median, 6.9 mSv; interquartile range, 3.8213.8 mSv; n = 6218) were similar to those of staff wearing two badges (median, 7.1 mSv; interquartile range, 4.6-11.2 mSv; n = 1449) (P = .18), suggesting a similar radiation environment. Conclusion These workers are among the highest exposed to elevated levels of ionizing radiation, although their occupational doses are within U.S. regulatory limits. This is a population that requires consistent and accurate dose monitoring; however, failure to return one or both badges, reversal of badges, and improper badge placement are a major hindrance to this goal. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Karellas in this issue.
Background Staff who perform fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures are among the most highly radiation-exposed groups in medicine. However, there are limited data on monthly or annual doses (or dose trends over time) for these workers. Purpose To summarize occupational badge doses (lens dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent values) for medical staff performing or assisting with FGI procedures in 3 recent years after accounting for uninformative values and one- versus two-badge monitoring protocol. Materials and Methods Badge dose entries of medical workers believed to have performed or assisted with FGI procedures were retrospectively collected from the largest dosimetry provider in the United States for 49 991, 81 561, and 125 669 medical staff corresponding to years 2009, 2012, and 2015, respectively. Entries judged to be uninformative of occupational doses to FGI procedures staff were excluded. Monthly and annual occupational doses were described using summary statistics. Results After exclusions, 22.2% (153 033 of 687 912) of the two- and 32.9% (450 173 of 1 366 736) of the one-badge entries were judged to be informative. There were 335 225 and 916 563 of the two- and one-badge entries excluded, respectively, with minimal readings in the above-apron badge. Among the two-badge entries, 123 595 were incomplete and 76 059 had readings indicating incorrect wear of the badges. From 2009 to 2015 there was no change in lens dose equivalent values among workers who wore one badge ( = .96) or those who wore two badges ( = .23). Annual lens dose equivalents for workers wearing one badge (median, 6.9 mSv; interquartile range, 3.8213.8 mSv; = 6218) were similar to those of staff wearing two badges (median, 7.1 mSv; interquartile range, 4.6-11.2 mSv; = 1449) ( = .18), suggesting a similar radiation environment. Conclusion These workers are among the highest exposed to elevated levels of ionizing radiation, although their occupational doses are within U.S. regulatory limits. This is a population that requires consistent and accurate dose monitoring; however, failure to return one or both badges, reversal of badges, and improper badge placement are a major hindrance to this goal. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Karellas in this issue.
Author Kitahara, Cari M
Yoder, Craig
Balter, Stephen
Borrego, David
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: David
  orcidid: 0000-0001-9868-5113
  surname: Borrego
  fullname: Borrego, David
  organization: From the Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Dr, Bethesda, MD 20892-9778 (D.B., C.M.K.); Departments of Radiology and Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (S.B.); and Independent consultant, Weddington, NC (C.Y.)
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Cari M
  orcidid: 0000-0001-6416-4432
  surname: Kitahara
  fullname: Kitahara, Cari M
  organization: From the Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Dr, Bethesda, MD 20892-9778 (D.B., C.M.K.); Departments of Radiology and Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (S.B.); and Independent consultant, Weddington, NC (C.Y.)
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Stephen
  surname: Balter
  fullname: Balter, Stephen
  organization: From the Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Dr, Bethesda, MD 20892-9778 (D.B., C.M.K.); Departments of Radiology and Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (S.B.); and Independent consultant, Weddington, NC (C.Y.)
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Craig
  surname: Yoder
  fullname: Yoder, Craig
  organization: From the Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Dr, Bethesda, MD 20892-9778 (D.B., C.M.K.); Departments of Radiology and Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (S.B.); and Independent consultant, Weddington, NC (C.Y.)
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31769743$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNpNkM1OwzAQhC1URH_gAbggH7mkxHYSx8eq0FKpqJXoPXLtDRglcbAdUN-eRBSJ086uvh1pZopGjW0AoVsSzwlJ8gcntbHVnMZEEBHHJL9AE5JSHhFG0tE_PUZT7z96IklzfoXGjPBM8IRNkNsp1bUyGNvICj9aDx4Hi19AG9UfXoMsS7wHV1pXm-YNW4cX3hsfhuXbhHe8qjrrrFe2HT6qE153RoPGmyaA-4LmbL13VoHuHPhrdFnKysPNec7QYfV0WD5H2916s1xsI8WECJGWJQgS5zSOmchKJtWRCpWlOksgUZQrTjnhmlN5lLTsowpByVALlKKXdIbuf21bZz878KGojVdQVbIB2_mCMpJzliV0QO_OaHesQRetM7V0p-KvJvoD3rluQg
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1080_10420150_2024_2405983
crossref_primary_10_3390_radiation4030016
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncab094
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jvir_2021_10_027
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncad072
crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20210436
crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6560_abe83a
crossref_primary_10_1148_radiol_2019192414
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jradnu_2022_05_006
crossref_primary_10_1097_HP_0000000000001730
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejmp_2020_04_028
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejvs_2023_03_041
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmir_2024_101848
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncac006
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncad215
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncab152
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncad275
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncaa187
crossref_primary_10_1148_radiol_2021204501
crossref_primary_10_3390_app13169182
crossref_primary_10_1007_s10840_022_01173_5
crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_ac9394
crossref_primary_10_1002_acm2_13526
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejvs_2022_09_005
crossref_primary_10_1097_HP_0000000000001961
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncab107
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2021_110114
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jvir_2023_03_033
crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_acd858
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncad103
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jvir_2024_03_032
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncac098
crossref_primary_10_1051_radiopro_2025003
crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncab045
ContentType Journal Article
DBID CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1148/radiol.2019190018
DatabaseName Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE - Academic
MEDLINE
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 7X8
  name: MEDLINE - Academic
  url: https://search.proquest.com/medline
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod no_fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 1527-1315
ExternalDocumentID 31769743
Genre Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural
GroupedDBID ---
.55
.GJ
123
18M
1CY
1KJ
29P
2WC
34G
39C
4.4
53G
5RE
6NX
6PF
7FM
AAEJM
AAQQT
AAWTL
ABDPE
ABHFT
ABOCM
ACFQH
ACGFO
ACJAN
ACRZS
ADBBV
AENEX
AENYM
AFFNX
AFOSN
AJJEV
AJWWR
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
BAWUL
CGR
CS3
CUY
CVF
DIK
DU5
E3Z
EBS
ECM
EIF
EJD
F5P
F9R
GX1
H13
J5H
KO8
L7B
LMP
LSO
MJL
MV1
N4W
NPM
OK1
P2P
R.V
RKKAF
RXW
SJN
TAE
TR2
TRS
TWZ
W8F
WH7
WOQ
X7M
YQI
YQJ
ZGI
ZKG
ZVN
ZXP
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-dafe9108200396f3acb29c65d64e4c27c72717d72aba2f15299211148ef99922
IEDL.DBID 7X8
ISICitedReferencesCount 36
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000508455500021&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 1527-1315
IngestDate Thu Sep 04 18:49:21 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 03 06:58:22 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess false
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 2
Language English
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c399t-dafe9108200396f3acb29c65d64e4c27c72717d72aba2f15299211148ef99922
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ORCID 0000-0001-9868-5113
0000-0001-6416-4432
OpenAccessLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6996708
PMID 31769743
PQID 2318736422
PQPubID 23479
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_2318736422
pubmed_primary_31769743
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2020-02-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2020-02-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 02
  year: 2020
  text: 2020-02-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle Radiology
PublicationTitleAlternate Radiology
PublicationYear 2020
References 31770079 - Radiology. 2020 Feb;294(2):360-361
References_xml – reference: 31770079 - Radiology. 2020 Feb;294(2):360-361
SSID ssj0014587
Score 2.4804647
Snippet Background Staff who perform fluoroscopically guided interventional (FGI) procedures are among the most highly radiation-exposed groups in medicine. However,...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
StartPage 353
SubjectTerms Fluoroscopy - methods
Humans
Medical Staff - statistics & numerical data
Occupational Exposure - statistics & numerical data
Radiation Dosage
Radiation Exposure - statistics & numerical data
Radiation Protection
Radiography, Interventional - methods
Retrospective Studies
Title Occupational Doses to Medical Staff Performing or Assisting with Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Procedures
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31769743
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2318736422
Volume 294
WOSCitedRecordID wos000508455500021&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1LSwMxEA5qRbz4ftQXEbwubZPsZnMSUauCLT300NuSzQMKsqndVvDfO7Pd0l4EwcvCHrIsk0nyzXyT-Qi5c9Yoz72LtLRJJEyew5pzncgnrq25E8zaqs_su-z309FIDeqEW1mXVS73xGqjtsFgjrwFOCSVHNAyu598RqgahexqLaGxSRocoAx6tRytWAQRVwJ5qNwadXgnrllNiABaU23HAakHiFcUKtP9jjCrk6a7_99_PCB7NcakDwunOCQbrjgiO72aRT8m0_XWwvQplK6ks0Brzoaioq-ng8WNAjjZaJhSmEXcDOAFE7e0-zEP2AYzTHDExzd9mY-ts_RtrYISvlTdQrBziOhPyLD7PHx8jWrthciAHWeR1d4Bkkixdk0lnmuTM2WS2CbCCcOkAdzTkVYynWvmwcJKQSgJlnVeYavbU7JVhMKdEypSYaRlypq2Fmns0tgIiZlXpRPDuGiS26UxM3Bt5Ct04cK8zFbmbJKzxYxkk0UPjgxgTwKhEL_4w-hLssswSq5qra9Iw8PCdtdk23zNxuX0pvIZePYHvR9iPM4g
linkProvider ProQuest
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Occupational+Doses+to+Medical+Staff+Performing+or+Assisting+with+Fluoroscopically+Guided+Interventional+Procedures&rft.jtitle=Radiology&rft.au=Borrego%2C+David&rft.au=Kitahara%2C+Cari+M&rft.au=Balter%2C+Stephen&rft.au=Yoder%2C+Craig&rft.date=2020-02-01&rft.eissn=1527-1315&rft.volume=294&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=353&rft_id=info:doi/10.1148%2Fradiol.2019190018&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F31769743&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F31769743&rft.externalDocID=31769743
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1527-1315&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1527-1315&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1527-1315&client=summon