ArticleEnvironmental and occupational health practice2023
Effectiveness of a radiation management safety checklist for non-vascular imaging and interventional radiology at a medical facility.
Article in Environmental and occupational health practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: To investigate whether implementing a radiation management safety checklist (RMSC) can improve personnel dosimetry among physicians' dosimeter wearing rate for those performing fluoroscopy. Methods: Initially, we visually inspected whether the physicians were wearing personal dosimeters. Subsequently, during a "time-out" period recommended by the RMSC, the medical worker mutually confirmed whether the personal dosimeters were worn correctly. If errors in personnel dosimetry were noted, verbal recommendations to correct the error and follow double dosimetry were made. Lastly, the physicians' dosimeter wearing rates before and during RMSC implementation were compared and analyzed. Results: Before the measurement period, the personal dosimeter wearing rate among all physicians who perform fluoroscopy at the study center (n=72) was 58.2%; during the measurement period, it reached 80.1% (χ Conclusions: The risk of radiation injury may have been overlooked among physicians involved in fluoroscopy and other routine clinical practices that cause radiation exposure. The investigated medical facilities registered physicians as radiation workers at the individual's discretion. There is an urgent need to develop a radiation management system that mandates the use of personal dosimeters among all physicians at risk of radiation exposure.
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.