Volume : 10, Issue : 08, August – 2023
Title:
33.MEASURE TO REDUCE PATIENT RADIATION DOSE WITHOUT AFFECTING IMAGE QUALITY
Authors :
Mohamed Ahmed Sharaf, Turki Muawwadh A Mania, Ali Jafar T Almarzooq, Ali Abdoh M Khawaji, Omar Ali Quzi, Hassan Hamad N Khardali
Abstract :
Introduction: Despite widespread agreement that nuclear medicine is largely beneficial to patients when used for appropriate reasons, concerns have been expressed about the possibility that cancer could be caused by it because of the exponentially growing usage of high radiation exposure in medicine. The most crucial method for reducing this potential risk is to keep radiation exposure as low as reasonably possible (ALARA) while still performing the diagnostic work.
Aim of the study: The common technical approaches for managing radiation exposure are outlined in this article. Future thoughts on dose reduction are discussed, along with dose-management measures.
Methodology: The literature review is a comprehensive research of PUBMED since the year 1999-2020
Conclusion: Medical imaging has numerous crucial therapeutic applications and can have a big impact. However, there are dangers associated with CT, fluoroscopy, and nuclear medicine imaging methods. A well-rounded public health strategy aims to minimise the hazards while promoting the advantages of medical imaging. The FDA, other departments of the federal government, and the medical community can all contribute to such an approach. The FDA and our partners will seek to meaningfully reduce the unnecessary radiation exposure of patients during CT, fluoroscopy, and nuclear medicine imaging exams through the Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Radiation Exposure from Medical Imaging.
Keywords: Radiation exposure, measures to control radiation, nuclear medicine, CT Scan, ALARA
Cite This Article:
Please cite this article in press Mohamed Ahmed Sharaf et al, Measure To Reduce Patient Radiation Dose Without Affecting Image Quality, Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2023; 10 (08).
Number of Downloads : 10
References:
1. Obuchowski N A, Graham R J, Baker M E, & Powell K A (2001). Ten criteria for effective screening: their application to multislice CT screening for pulmonary and colorectal cancers. American Journal of Roentgenology, 176(6), 1357-1362.
2. Mettler Jr F A, Huda W, Yoshizumi T T, & Mahesh M (2008). Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology, 248(1), 254-263.
3. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, NCRP Report No. 160: Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, March 3, 2009, pp. 142-146.
4. Biswas D, Bible J E, Bohan M, Simpson A K, Whang P. G, & Grauer J N (2009). Radiation exposure from musculoskeletal computerized tomographic scans. JBJS, 91(8), 1882-1889.
5. In the early 1980’s, the U.S. population’s per capita exposure to ionizing radiation from all sources was 3.6 mSv. By 2006, that figure had risen to 6.25 mSv. (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, NCRP Report No. 160, March 2009, pp. 242-243.)
6. Schauer D A, & Linton O W (2009). National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements report shows substantial medical exposure increase. Radiology, 253(2), 293-296..
7. Brody A S, Frush D P, Huda W, Brent R L, & Section on Radiology (2007). Radiation risk to children from computed tomography. Pediatrics, 120(3), 677-682.
8. De González A B, Mahesh M, Kim K P, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, & Land C (2009). Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Archives of internal medicine, 169(22), 2071-2077.
9. Brenner D J, & Hall E J (2007). Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. New England journal of medicine, 357(22), 2277-2284..
10. Harvey H B, Chow D, Boston M, Zhao J, Lucey L, & Monticciolo D L (2014). Initial outcomes from federally mandated accreditation site surveys of advanced diagnostic imaging facilities performed by the ACR. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 11(7), 686-691.
11. Medicare and Medicaid programs (1999). Hospital conditions of participation: patients’ rights (42 CFR 482). Federal Register, 64(127), 36069-36089.
12. Gliklich R E, Leavy M B, & Dreyer N A (2020). Planning a registry. In Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide [Internet]. 4th edition. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US).
13. Morin R L, Coombs L P, & Chatfield M B (2011). ACR dose index registry. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 8(4), 288-291.
14. Raff G L, Chinnaiyan K M, Share D A, Goraya T Y, Kazerooni E A, Moscucci M, & Advanced Cardiovascular Imaging Consortium Co-Investigators. (2009). Radiation dose from cardiac computed tomography before and after implementation of radiation dose–reduction techniques. Jama, 301(22), 2340-2348.
15. Yip M, & Das N (2019). Robot autonomy for surgery. In The Encyclopedia of MEDICAL ROBOTICS: Volume 1 Minimally Invasive Surgical Robotics (pp. 281-313).