Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr 21;1(1):e5.
doi: 10.1002/deo2.5. eCollection 2021 Apr.

A questionnaire survey on radiation protection among 282 medical staff from 26 endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan

Affiliations

A questionnaire survey on radiation protection among 282 medical staff from 26 endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan

Shiro Hayashi et al. DEN Open. .

Abstract

Background and aims: It is essential for endoscopists, technologists, and nurses to understand radiation protection. However, protective equipment usage is still low, and there is little awareness of radiation protection in practice.

Methods: We conducted a questionnaire survey on radiation protection from January to February 2020. The participants were medical staff, including medical doctors, nurses, and radiological and endoscopy technician in endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments. The questionnaire included 14 multiple-choice questions divided among three parts: background, equipment, and knowledge.

Results: We surveyed a total of 282 subjects from 26 institutions. There were 168 medical doctors (60%), 90 nurses (32%), and 24 technologists (9%). Although almost all staff members (99%) always wore a lead apron, only a few wore a thyroid collar (32%) and lead glasses (21%). The rate of wearing a radiation dosimeter was insufficient (69%), especially among doctors (52%). A few subjects knew the radiation exposure dose of each procedure (15%), and slightly over half had attended lectures on radiation protection (64%) and knew about the three principles of radiation protection (59%). Protection adherence did not differ by years of experience, knowledge of fluoroscopy, awareness of radiation exposure doses, or attendance at basic lectures on radiation protection. However, medical doctors who were aware of the radiation exposure dose of each procedure were significantly more likely to wear dosimeters than those who were not (p = 0.0008).

Conclusion: Medical staff in endoscopy departments in Japan do not have enough radiation protection equipment or education.

Keywords: education; endoscopy; medical staff; questionnaire survey; radiation protection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflict of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this paper.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Rates of use of protective equipment for radiation exposure according to job title

References

    1. De González AB, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X‐rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. The Lancet 2004; 363: 345–51. - PubMed
    1. Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ 2013; 346: f2360. - PMC - PubMed
    1. ICRP . Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures ICRP publication 85. Ann ICRP 2000; 30: 7–67. - PubMed
    1. ICRP . Education and training in radiological protection for diagnostic and interventional procedures ICRP Publication 113. Ann ICRP 2009; 39: 7–68. - PubMed
    1. World Gastroenterology Organisation . Radiation protection in the endoscopy suite. 2020. https://www.worldgastroenterology.org/guidelines/global-guidelines/radia.... Accessed October 2, 2020.