ArticleRevista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT
The practice of radiation protection in an interventional neuroradiology service.
Article in Revista brasileira de medicina do trabalho : publicacao oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho-ANAMT. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Interventional neuroradiology procedures subject professionals who work in this area to high doses of ionizing radiation, and such exposure leads to a higher chance of occupational diseases related to this physical risk. Radiation protection practices aim to reduce the occurrence of such damage to the health of these workers. Objectives: To identify how the practice of radiation protection occurs in a multidisciplinary team of an interventional neuroradiology service in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil. Methods: A qualitative, exploratory, and descriptive research conducted with nine health professionals from the multidisciplinary team. Non-participant observation and a survey form were used as data collection techniques. For data analysis, descriptive analysis based on absolute and relative frequency and content analysis were used. Results: Although some practices showed the use of radiation protection measures in practice, such as workers taking turns to perform procedures and continuous use of the lead apron as well as the mobile suspended protection, we found that most of the practices violate the principles of radiation protection. Among these inadequate radiological protection practices, the following aspects were observed: not wearing lead goggles, not using collimation to obtain the image, poor knowledge of the principles of radiation protection and biological effects of ionizing radiation, and non-use of an individual dosimeter. Conclusions: There was a lack of know-how of the multidisciplinary team working in interventional neuroradiology regarding the practice of radiation protection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.