Radiation protection of patients in diagnostic radiology: Status of practice in five Eastern-European countries, based on IAEA project

Assessment of average glandular dose in mammography practice of a teaching hospital in Ghana

Introduction

above the age of 40, women are advised to begin breast examinations and screenings for early detection of breast cancer. The average glandular dose (AGD) provides dosimetric information about the quantity of radiation received by the mammary glands during mammographic exposures. There is, therefore, the need to analyse the radiation dose received by patients presenting for mammography examinations.

Methods

a retrospective cross-sectional design was carried out on the data of 663 participants, conveniently sampled between the months of July 2021 and June 2022. Paired T-test was used to compare imaging parameters for cranio-caudal (CC), medio-lateral (ML), automatic exposure control (AEC), manual exposure control (MEC), and left and right breast. Pearson´s correlation was used to test for relationship between imaging parameters and AGD.

Results

the mean AGD per exposure was 1.9 ± 0.7 mGy for CC projections and 2.3 ± 1.2 mGy for ML projections. The mean AGD per examination for the study was 4.1 ± 1.4 mGy. A positive correlation was found between AGD per examination and exposure factors (tube loading and tube voltage), compressed breast thickness, and compression force. Patient age had no statistically significant relationship with the AGD per examination.

Conclusion

average glandular dose (AGD) was consistent with other findings in literature studies. It was also observed that MEC yielded lower AGD per exposure values than AEC. There was no significant difference in the mean AGD per exposure for left and right breasts.

Identification of research priorities of radiography science: A modified Delphi study in Europe

Radiography science is a new discipline among health sciences. It is a discipline that investigates phenomena in medical imaging, radiation therapy, and nuclear medicine. It has merged from the need to provide research evidence to support these services. The domain of the discipline needs clarification and more research should be focused on its paradigmatic issues. Radiography research priorities have been previously charted on a national level in different countries but the viewpoint has been that of the needs of the profession, not of the discipline. This study aimed to identify the priorities of the discipline. The method chosen was a modified version of the Delphi technique with two rounds. The expert panel consisted of 24 European radiography researchers with long professional experience. This study shows that the research priorities in radiography science are related to the phenomena of radiographers' profession, clinical practices, and the safe and high-quality use of radiation and technology for medical imaging, radiotherapy, and nuclear medicine. Identifying these priorities can help focus research onto most important topics and clarify disciplinary perspective.

Determinants of using (non-)fluoroscopy-guided positioning for radiographs: a case study research

This study examines the determinants of using (non-)fluoroscopy-guided positioning (FGP) for radiographs, in order to improve the use of non-FGP imaging techniques. We focused on knowledge and attitudes of radiographers and radiologists with respect to applying non-FGP in radiography and organizational factors. We analyzed data from an in-depth multiple case study that includes observations and field notes, interviews, documents and images collected from the radiology departments of four hospitals. The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) was used to frame the findings. We found that inadequate skills and insufficient knowledge of positioning techniques and negative attitudes towards non-FGP were present. More precisely, staff expressed concerns with respect to the impact on the workload and workflow. Besides facilitating organizational conditions, the social influence of peers and the clinical leadership of RLs were found to be important. Adequate supervision, regular feedback and coaching were identified as important enabling factors for increasing the quality of the applied imaging techniques. In the conclusion we state that determinants of using non-FGP are quite complex. Therefore we argue that a holistic approach considering all these aspects is needed to improve imaging practices.