PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16461510

Protocols for dosimetry and patient reference levels.

K Faulkner
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Doses in radiology should be as low as reasonably achievable. In order to compare practice in different centres it is necessary to compare patient doses. This can only be undertaken if dosimetry studies are similar. In order to facilitate comparisons, the DIMOND consortium developed a patient dosimetry protocol. Reference doses have been proposed to identify centres where optimisation studies would be of benefit. Whilst reference doses have been established for common radiographic and fluoroscopic examinations, little research has been undertaken in the area of digital radiology, partly owing to the rapid technological changes occurring in digital and interventional radiology. Dosimetry data obtained by the DIMOND research project were compared with data from published literature. Data for various digital and interventional radiology procedures were reviewed. Proposals are made for reference doses. There is obviously a need for standardised approaches to patient dosimetry, which should be recorded in the hospital's information system.

Explore related subjects

AngioplastyCoronary AngiographyFluoroscopyHumansModels, StatisticalRadiation DosageRadiation ProtectionRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiography, InterventionalRadiologyRadiometryReference StandardsJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K Faulkner. 2006-02-03. Protocols for dosimetry and patient reference levels.. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd%2Fnci715

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Changing attitudes toward endolumenal therapy.

BACKGROUND: As with new laparoscopic techniques, the ability to convince surgeons and gastroenterologists to embrace endolumenal techniques and the additional training required to perform the new procedures will correlate with how rapidly endolumenal therapies are adopted. The authors measured their ability to change attitudes among surgeons, who may or may not perform endoscopy as a part of their practice, toward endolumenal therapies. METHODS: As part of the endoluminal therapy postgraduate course presented at the annual Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) meeting in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 2005, experts presented current literature and data on new endolumenal techniques. The participants, primarily of surgeons, were polled electronically about a number of case scenarios before and after their presentation. Each scenario was relevant to the topic presented and chosen to reflect potentially controversial disease processes with traditional or endolumenal treatment options. The responses were collected in real time and displayed to course participants. RESULTS: A panel of 10 experts presented data on a range of endolumenal therapies including endolumenal treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), endoscopic stenting, endoscopic treatments in bariatric surgery, intraoperative endoscopy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), mucosal ablation for Barrett's esophagus, intralumenal resection, translumenal endoscopic surgery, and how to educate surgeons in new endolumenal techniques. Demographic data showed that 83.6% of the participants performed endoscopy as part of their practice. A comparison with traditional surgical options showed a statistically significant positive attitude change (p < 0.05) toward adoption of most endolumenal techniques after expert presentation. Only EMR and TEM did not show a statistically significant change in the participants' willingness to adopt these techniques. There was no significant change in the attitudes of how best to train surgeons. After presentation of the training options, 76% of the respondents believed that these techniques should be taught in residency. CONCLUSIONS: The education of surgeons in new endolumenal therapeutic techniques can have a significant impact in terms of changing practice attitudes and may accelerate adoption of new endoscopic techniques.

Angioplasty↗
PubMed2007

Mechanical interventions to treat acute stroke.

The approach to stroke therapy has historically been limited due to the existence of relatively few treatment options and the necessity for action within 3 hours of symptom onset. As neuroimaging technology advances, fertile new ground is revealed for novel therapies. Recently, a number of exciting mechanical systems have been developed with potential efficacy even hours after cerebrovascular occlusion: endovascular clot disruption, endovascular clot extraction, and angioplasty with stenting are currently under study, with promising initial results. With more options, each with greater effectiveness in a particular clinical scenario, the physician is now better equipped than ever to treat acute ischemic stroke successfully.

Angioplasty↗