Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38705937›Full record

ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2024

Occupational radiation exposure among medical personnel in university and general hospitals in Japan.

Arman Nessipkhan, Naoki Matsuda, Noboru Takamura, Noboru Oriuchi, Hiroshi Ito, Masao Kiguchi, Kiyoto Nishihara, Takayuki Tamaru, Kazuo Awai, Takashi Kudo

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Arman NessipkhanDepartment of Radioisotope Medicine, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Sakamoto 1-12-4, Nagasaki, 852-8523, Japan. armani_94vg@mail.ru.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2478-2791
Naoki MatsudaDepartment of Radiation Biology and Protection, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan.
Noboru TakamuraDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan.
Noboru OriuchiAdvanced Clinical Research Center, Fukushima Global Medical Science Center, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
Hiroshi ItoDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
Masao KiguchiDepartment of Clinical Support, Hiroshima University Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kiyoto NishiharaDepartment of Radiological Technology, Hiroshima City Hiroshima Citizens Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan.
Takayuki TamaruDepartment of Radiology, JA Hiroshima General Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kazuo AwaiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Takashi KudoDepartment of Radioisotope Medicine, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan.

Funding

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare 19701-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to compare the occupational radiation exposure of medical workers between general hospitals and university hospitals.

methodsRadiation exposure data from three hospitals in Hiroshima city, including one university hospital and two general hospitals, were collected using personal dosimeters. Monthly radiation doses were analyzed, and the annual sum of radiation exposure dose was calculated for 538 subjects in general hospitals and 1224 subjects in the university hospital. To assess the impact of locality, additional data from Nagasaki University Hospital and Fukushima Medical University Hospital were included for comparative analysis. Professional affiliations, such as doctors, nurses, and radiological technologists, were considered in the evaluation.

resultsThe study revealed slight but significant differences in radiation doses between general and university hospitals. In general hospitals, except for radiological technologists, a slightly higher radiation dose was observed compared to university hospitals. Despite the annual increase in the use of medical radiation, the majority of hospital workers in both settings adhered to safety guidelines, with occupational radiation exposure remaining below the limit of detection (LOD). Workers who involved in fluoroscopic procedure, whether at university or general hospitals, had higher radiation doses than those who did not.

conclusionThe study's primary conclusion is that workers in general hospitals experience a slight but significantly higher radiation dose and a lower percentage below the LOD compared to university hospitals. The observed difference is attributed to the greater workload at general hospitals than at university hospitals, and also may be due to the different nature of university hospital and general hospital. University hospitals, characterized by greater academic orientation, tend to benefit from comprehensive support systems, specialized expertise, and advanced technology, leading to more structured and regulated radiation control. These findings provide a basis for targeted interventions, improved safety protocols.

Indexed as

Hospitals, GeneralHospitals, UniversityOccupational ExposureRadiation DosageRadiation ExposureAdultFemaleHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedGeneral hospitalMedical exposureOccupational radiation exposureRadiation controlRadiation protectionUniversity hospital

Identifiers

PMID38705937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.