[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: fluoroscopy exposures to physicians?
Be careful putting a lot of stock in dosimetry records unless you know the
facility. It has been my experience that many of these physicians like to
keep their dosimeters in their desk drawers. Some just can't be bothered
with remembering to wear a monitor and others don't want to be bothered with
dealing with high readings. I imagine one could make a pretty good estimate
knowing a physicians workload, although, some physicians use provided
shielding diligently while others push it out of the way. For physicians
that wear dosimeters, it certainly isn't unusual to exceed 1250 mrem per
quarter, but I would say the average is closer to 800-900 mrem.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ted de Castro [mailto:tdc@xrayted.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:17 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: fluoroscopy exposures to physicians?
Yes Sandy,
My experience as an in house HP at a medical facility and then as a
consultant would tend to agree with those numbers.
HOWEVER, Be it noted that it is difficult to be SURE where to dosimeter
was worn and MANY like to wear them at the waistline on the apron belt -
and this practice substantially increases the dosimeter indication.
Sandy Perle wrote:
>
> While I can't share actual data from our records, I can assure you
> that the typical monthly exposure for those who wear a collar badge
> (and sometimes a chest badge under the lead apron), the dose to the
> collar for the vast majority exceed 1 rem exposure. In many cases,
> the QTD and YTD doses exceed the regulatory dose limits established
> in state radiation program regulations. Only through the use of dose
> weighting calculations, such as the Webster or Niklasson dose
> weighting, can they be considered within the dose limits imposed by
> regulatory statutes. Of course those states who are not agreement
> states, and have not adopted the annual dose limits and other
> philosophy, the physician, while they can calculate an EDE and remain
> below regulatory limits, they still have a problem with dose to the
> eye, in that dose weighting does not apply to the eye (lens dose
> equivalent) nor the skin (shallow dose equivalent). In essence, the
> eye dose, which is equal to the whole body dose, in the states where
> there is no annual LDE, always exceeds the 1.25 rem/qtr. Another good
> reason why all states should adopt the annual limits for DDE, LDE and
> SDE.
>
> As far as correlation of this dose to cancer .. well, that's another
> interesting item for epidemiologists. I would hypothesize that the
> data suggests no correlation, or else we would have heard lots about
> this already.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sandy Perle Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800)
548-5100
> Director, Technical Extension 2306
> ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service Fax:(714) 668-3149
> ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. E-Mail:
sandyfl@earthlink.net
> ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
> Costa Mesa, CA 92626
>
> Personal Website: http://sandyfl.nukeworker.net
> ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html