ArticleSkeletal radiology2020
Underestimation of fluoroscopic exposure among orthopedic residents.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Investigation of Radiation Exposure of Medical Staff During Lateral Fluoroscopy for Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesConcerns about radiation exposure for health care workers have increased in the last decade, along with the increased use of fluoroscopic imaging for surgical procedures. Recent literature suggests that surgeons with the least experience have higher exposure during surgery, and their perception of exposure may be lower. The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of orthopedic resident trainees' estimates of their exposure during fluoroscopy cases. MATERIALS AND
methodsOrthopedic resident trainees were surveyed after participation in various fluoroscopic orthopedic surgeries and asked to estimate the number of fluoroscopy exposures used. Their answers were compared against the actual number of exposures retrieved from the fluoroscopy machine. The perceived number of exposures was then compared to the actual number taken for junior residents in training year 1, 2, or 3 versus senior residents in training year 4 or 5.
resultsNineteen residents were surveyed, 13 of which were junior residents and six of which were senior residents. Of the 13 junior-level residents, total estimation was 441 exposures, versus 1411 actual exposures, an underestimation of over 69%. The six senior residents totaled 457 estimated exposures, compared to 645 actual exposures, for an underestimation of just under 30%.
conclusionsIn this survey study at a single institution, junior-level residents greatly underestimated radiation exposure compared to senior-level residents. Trainees should be aware that they grossly underestimate their exposure levels during procedures, and residency programs should emphasize fluoroscopic training early.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31384979What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.