Search Article 
  
 Advanced search 
  
 
About us - Editorial board - Browse articles - Submit article - Instructions - Subscribe - Advertise - Contacts - Login 
  Users Online: 896 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size   

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 34

A Study on the Use of Radiation-Protective Apron among Interventionists in Radiology


Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Shyamkumar N Keshava
Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore - 632 004, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcis.JCIS_34_18

Rights and Permissions

Objective: Radiation-protective aprons are commonly used by interventionists to protect against the harmful effects of ionizing radiation. Choice of appropriate aprons with respect to lead equivalence and weight is necessary for effective protection and reduced physical strain. This study evaluates the knowledge and practice of using radiation-protective aprons by interventionists. Materials and Methods: Ninety-one interventional radiologists who attended an annual interventional conference were provided with a questionnaire which included age, years of experience, area of expertise, type and weight of apron used, and physical strain caused due to the use of apron. Results: About 14.3% of the interventionists practiced in an angiographic suite for less than an hour a day, 45% for 2–4 h, 21% for 4–6 h, 10% for 6–10 h, and the rest above 10 h/day. About 68% of the interventionists wore 0.5 mm lead-equivalent (Pbeq) aprons; 15.4% with 0.25 mm Pbeq; about 5.5% with 0.35 mm Pbeqaprons, and the remaining were not aware of the lead equivalence. About 47% reported that they had body aches due to wearing single-sided aprons. Interventionists working more than 10 h/day wearing single-sided lead apron predominantly complained of shoulder pain and back pain. Conclusion: A large fraction of interventionists reported that they had physical strain. It is suggestive for interventionists to wear correct fit and light-weight aprons with appropriate lead equivalence.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed126    
    Printed10    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded35    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal