Radiography
Volume 16, Issue 2 , Pages 131-135 , May 2010

The effect of patient shield position on gonad dose during lumbar spine radiography

  • Conor L. Clancy

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, Garden Hill House, St. James Hospital, James Street, Dublin, Ireland
    • ,
  • Geraldine O'Reilly

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, Garden Hill House, St. James Hospital, James Street, Dublin, Ireland
    • ,
  • Patrick C. Brennan

      Affiliations

    • Discipline of Medical Radiation Sciences, C42 - Cumberland Campus, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe NSW 2141, Australia
    • ,
  • Mark F. McEntee

      Affiliations

    • School of Medicine and Medical Science, Health Sciences Centre, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +353 1 7166536; fax: +353 1 7166547.

Received 3 March 2009 ,Revised 28 September 2009 ,Accepted 3 October 2009.

References 

  1. Hart D, Wall BF. UK population dose from medical x-ray examinations. Eur J Radiol. 2004;50:285–291
  2. International Commission on Radiological Protection . Recommendations of the ICRP. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1991;Publication No. 60
  3. Commission of European Communities . European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images. Brussels, Belgium: EUR 16260EN; 1996;The European Commission
  4. Doolan A, Brennan PC, Rainford LA, Healy J. Gonad protection for the antero-posterior projection of the pelvis in diagnostic radiography in Dublin hospitals. Radiography. 2004;10:15–21
  5. Yde LeBoeuf, Charlotte DC. At what age does low back pain become a common problem? a study of 29,424 individuals aged 12-41 years. Spine. 1998;23(2):228–234
  6. Wainwright AM. Shielding reproductive organs of orthopaedic patients during pelvic radiography. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2000;82(5):318–321
  7. Clancy CL, O Reilly G, Brennan PC, Mc Entee MF. A survey of the use of patient shielding in conventional lumbar spine radiography in the Republic of Ireland. Radiography Ireland. 2008;12(1):10–13
  8. IPEM/CoR/NRPB. Recommended standards for the routine performance testing of diagnostic x-ray imaging systems. IPEM Report No. 77. York: IPEM; 1997.
  9. Ballinger PW, Eugene DF. 10th ed. Merrill's atlas of radiographic positions and radiologic procedures. vol. 1. Mosby; 2003;
  10. Finnerty M, Brennan PC. Protective aprons in imaging departments: manufacturer stated lead equivalence values require validation. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(7):1477–1484
  11. IPEM. Medical guidance notes. Paragraph 3.119; 2002.
  12. Backhouse KM, Hutchings RT. Clinical surface anatomy. vol. 106. Barcelona, Spain: Mosby-Wolfe; 1998;
  13. In:  Williams PL,  Bannister LH,  Berry MM,  Collins P,  Dyson M,  Dussek JE editor. Gray's anatomy. 38th ed. Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone; 1995;p. 1861
  14. Liakos P, Schoenecker PL, Lyons D, Gordon JE. Evaluation of the efficacy of pelvic shielding in preadolescent girls. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001;21(4):433–435
  15. Weatherburn GC. Reducing radiation doses to the breast thyroid and the gonads during diagnostic radiography. Radiography. 1983;49:195–202
  16. Nic an Ghearr FA, Brennan PC. The PA projection of the abdomen: a dose reduction technique. Radiography. 1998;4(3):195–203
  17. Brennan PC, Madigan E. Lumbar spine radiology: analysis of the posteroanterior projection. Eur J Radiol. 2000;10(7):1197–1201
  18. Royal college of radiologists. Making the best use of a department of clinical radiology: Guidelines for doctors. 5th ed. ISBN 1872599370.

PII: S1078-8174(09)00098-4

doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2009.10.004

Radiography
Volume 16, Issue 2 , Pages 131-135 , May 2010

Article Tools